But Dick’s quickly circumvented its pledge by opening its outdoor-focused Field & Stream chain.
After the mass shooting last February at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Dick’s was one of the first businesses in the U.S. to clamber on board the ensuing “March for Our Lives” gun-control movement by declaring they would stop selling assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, barr the legal sale of guns to those under age 21, and hire their own gun-control lobbyists to push for stricter gun laws nationwide.
At the time, Dick’s paradoxically predicted that although the move could hurt sales, it would also draw more shoppers to its stores.
In August, Dick’s admitted that sales at stores open for at least 12 months tumbled by a bigger-than-expected 4% during the second quarter. But Chairman and CEO Edward W. Stack put on a brave face, insisting he was confident sales would turn around.
Alas, Dick’s drop in sales is continuing, such that the company may soon close down their entire Field & Stream chain of 35 stores across 18 states.
On September 15, 2018, Dick’s billionaire CEO Edward Stack, 64, told investors during the Goldman Sachs Retailing Conference that same-store sales dropped 3.9%, that its “decisions…on firearms” has hurt sales of its hunting and outdoors business, and that it may close its outdoor-focused Field & Stream stores.
Stack, son of Dick’s Sporting Goods’ founder Richard “Dick” Stack, said:
“Well, we’ve made that decision at the end of February, what we’re going to do with firearms. And what we said is, we would not sell any of the assault-style rifles, we wouldn’t sell high-capacity magazines. We’d never sold bumps stocks which turn a semiautomatic weapon into basically an automatic weapon, and we wouldn’t sell firearms to anyone under 21 years of age.
So that’s in February. It’s still a little early to tell…. So we’ve had some vendors who’ve decided based on our decision to not sell the assault-style rifle that was used in the Parkland shooting that they wouldn’t sell us…any firearms anymore…. We’ve had some other people who’ve indicated that they wouldn’t shop with us any longer. So we’ve got to take a look and we’ll assess this through this holiday season, if the brands are going to continue to or not. Some brands are not going to continue to sell us. If consumers upset with us, we will make a decision of what we’re going to do with Field & Stream.
My sense is that we can either take a look at closing that store, that concept or reconceptualizing it into a more of an outdoor type concept and…as we move into the end of the fourth quarter, we’ll make a decision as to what we’re going to do.”
Having admitted that Dick’s gun-control stance has hurt sales, Stack whistles past the graveyard by entrenching even deeper in the company’s sales-losing policy. He said:
“We’ve made some decisions on firearms in the past and we’ve had a pretty good idea of what these consequences were going to be. We felt that was absolutely the right thing to do. We would do the same thing again if we had a mulligan so to speak to do it again. And but at the same time, our business has been pretty good….
So has it had an impact on the foot traffic and people who were upset with us on this? Yes. Has it
impacted our profitability? No. We found ways to offset that. We’re…taking 10 stores this fall and taking firearms out of all of those 10 stores and reconceptualizing the footprint, the product mix….we’re going to test this in 10 stores and see what happens.”
“Leonard Pozner” is the alleged father of alleged Sandy Hook child-victim Noah Pozner whose image, mysteriously, was among the posters of those who were killed by the Taliban in the Army Public School shooting massacre in Peshawar, Pakistan, on December 16, 2014, two years after Sandy Hook.
The name “Leonard Pozner” is between quotation marks because that persona may not be real. In fact, people search engines Spokeo and TruthFinder say there is no such person named “Leonard Pozner” in all of the United States.
Professor James Fetzer is among those who maintain that “Leonard Pozner” may in reality be an individual named Reuben Vabner, who is named by TruthFinder as one of the husbands of Veronique Pozner, the alleged ex-wife of Leonard and alleged mother of Noah.
Curiously, although Leonard Pozner is Veronique’s ex-husband and father of her child, he is not among Veronique’s possible relatives according to TruthFinder. But Reuben Vabner is.
More intriguing still is the search result obtained by Wolfgang Halbig in 2016, which shows “Leonard Pozner’s” social security number is that of a woman named Anna M. Maguire who had died on October 1, 1987 in zip code 02840, which is Newport, Rhode Island.
Interestingly, TruthFinder has very sparse information on Anna M. Maguire — no family members, no phone information, no social media — other than that she was born on Dec. 20, 1903; had lived at 10 Marin St., Newport, RI; and her social security number was issued in New York sometime between 1934 and 1951.
“Leonard Pozner” has harassed bloggers and YouTubers with DMCA copyright take-down demands, and is successful at it.
“Leonard Pozner” has also sued Wolfgang Halbig and Alex Jones on Sandy Hook. In his last lawsuit against Halbig, Lenny dropped the lawsuit when it came time for him to be deposed, under oath. Hmm . . . .
The latest “Leonard Pozner” effort at stifling free speech is his lawsuit against James Fetzer and his publisher, Moon Rock Books.
Below is a message from Fetzer, December 2, 2018:
As many of you will know, that’s me in the picture above, continuing my research at a recent JFK conference in Dallas last month.
And, as most of you know, I have dedicated my professional life to shedding light onto those events in our nation’s history—and in fact, world history—that have the power to shape what we think and do, including, of course, how future Americans—and citizens of other nations—interpret world events.
This is one of the reasons I—and several of my closest colleagues—created Moon Rock Books, which began with Nobody Died At Sandy Hook: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control, after Amazon banned it in November 2015.
We’re now up to 12 books—with several more released each year—which cover the most pressing issues of our times: 9/11, the Moon landing, the Boston Marathon bombing, Sandy Hook, the JFK assassination, Charlottesville, Parkland, and many more. And the only reason we can continue to produce these important books is because of the support you provide when you purchase them.
My research has come under fire recently, where websites and platforms I had used to present my—and others—conclusions, have been attacked: loads of videos from YouTube have been deleted, my James Fetzer Facebook page has been scrubbed, and my entire blog, at jamesfetzer.blogspot.com—with 770 blogs posted since 2011—was taken down. Even those who have had me as a guest on their shows have been attacked!
A real 21st century-style book burning. Mike Adams of Natural News went so far as declaring me “The Most Dangerous Mind in America,” because I approach topics like false flags using the scientific method. Fortunately, I have reconstituted my online presence and salvaged most of those blogs at jamesfetzer.org.
Now, I—and my most trusted colleagues—face perhaps our greatest challenge: a lawsuit from Leonard “Lenny” Pozner, the alleged father of one of the children ostensibly killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School almost six years ago. Lenny, whose real name appears to be Reuben Vabner, is suing me, my series editor, Mike Palecek, and Moon Rock Books for defamation, his ultimate goal being to shut down our ability to publish and to stifle free speech.
I am not at liberty to reveal any more information now other than to say that we will be challenging his suit vigorously. We don’t know how yet, and we’re not asking for any donations to a legal defense fund. If you would like to help, what I suggest is that you do what you’ve done in the past: buy our books—for yourself and/or as gifts—to help to fund our defense, by clicking the image below.
Have a wonderful Holiday Season! Thanks for your support of Moon Rock Books and the search for truth, without which we lose our way.
James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
Please support Jim Fetzer and free speech by purchasing his books from Moon Rock Books. Click here or slow-mail to:
Moon Rock Books
6256 Bullet Drive
Crestview, FL 32536
It is time the world knew what happened when Leonard Pozner sued Wolfgang Halbig, since the proceedings support the conclusion of many in the Sandy Hook Truth community that Lenny may not even be a real person, at all, but is somebody’s cyberpuppet. In a nutshell, Pozner never appeared for a single hearing in the case, not even for his deposition when–after numerous delays–the court ordered him to submit to it. Pozner dismissed the case right before that deposition was to take place.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Note: This article is based on collaborative research by Anne Berg, Alison Maynard and the author. Please note that extensive research, much of which is not included here, turned up surprising connections between places and people. Some may be merely coincidental while others may be significant. We have included them so that readers may be informed and arrive at their own conclusions. ~C
In Part 3 of our “Doors of Deception” series, we examined the connection between Room #5 at Sandy Hook Elementary school and the conga line photos by Shannon Hicks that helped build the myth of a police evacuation on 12-14-12. We concluded with our belief that a dual timeline was used, likely involving at least two dates for the photographic record.
In this post, we’ll go beyond the conga line in the Sandy Hook labyrinth – to points southwest and ultimately beyond Connecticut’s boundaries – to examine connections farther afield. If a common theme can be found for all that follows, we would have to settle on one word: Charity. Charity is a virtue, of course, but in the Sandy Hook story – indeed, in the story of our time – it carries other freight.
Let’s begin with an article from an obscure digital source from Oregon, the Bend Bulletin, titled “A Deeper Christmas in Sandy Hook.” The focus is on one of the conga line children, whose mother, Catherine Galda, has family ties to Bend. In the article, Mrs. Galda describes her experience after hearing about the lockdown at the school. After parking her car, she allegedly ran to the firehouse by foot where she met up with her daughter an hour later.
Mrs. Galda’s daughter, Hannah, isn’t clearly visible in the conga line because the child next to her has “her right arm stretched, obscuring Hannah’s face.” Hannah is in a pink top. The top of her head can be seen (based on her mother’s description) directly beneath the sleeve of the woman in the blue-and-white sweater:
The “Iconic” Photo. Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP
We’re told that Catherine Galda is a career psychotherapist married to husband James Galda, a plumber (not of the Watergate variety). It’s an odd juxtaposition, but that’s not what caught our attention.
Got resiliency? Mrs. Galda interested us because of her involvement in the Recovery and Resiliency* Team in Newtown. Her LinkedIn profile is impressive, listing credentials as a psychotherapist and social worker.
After 12-14-12, the Department of Justice bestowed $7 million on the town for the purpose of “recovery care” for Newtown residents. Some 800 families are said to have received counseling under the multi-million-dollar federal funding, according to this article.
The same article describes what happened after the money dried up in 2016: Newtown assembled its own local team of mental health professionals:
“The disbanding of a federally funded trauma team that helps people deal with the Sandy Hook massacre has forced the town to improvise to ensure the recovery care continues.”
In other words, to ensure the continuing flow of funding.
The article points to grants from sources like Praxair, Newtown-Sandy Hook Community Foundation and the federal Victims of Crime Act. And the following caption beneath a group photo discloses who would become the new mental health duennas:
“Deb DelVecchio-Scully, front left, Melissa Glaser, front right, Catherine Galda, back left and Margot Robins are working on a long-term plan for Newtown, Conn., after a federally funded trauma team that helped people deal with the Sandy Hook shootings wraps up its work.”
Recovery addiction: “This is who we are.” “It is a huge challenge, but we need to accept our reality and find the pathway to the resources we are going to be responsible for providing for decades,” First Selectman Pat Llodra was quoted as saying in the same article. “We have to be honest about it and own it and say ‘this is who we are.’ ”
The article goes on to say that more people are coming forward “needing support every day” due to the massacre. The article appeared four years after 12-14-12. Let’s ask the forbidden question: How long can community “recovery” go on? Especially considering how many directly involved in the incident no longer live in Newtown.
And that includes Mrs. Galda herself.
A sudden move. The dream job of 2016 didn’t hold Mrs. Galda in town long, but led to greener pastures. From her LinkedIn profile and the article here, we learn that she migrated due south to become Director with Catholic Charities in November 2016. It’s not surprising that Mrs. Galda’s new position in Central Florida is mostly about trauma and its management. From the article:
“With Behavioral Health, we seek to be holistic, caring for a person’s mind, body and soul. We also provide resources and coordinated care. We also seek to remove the stigma that has made it difficult for people to seek help. We want to help people understand how mental health affects physical health. We also look beyond the immediate concern and find the root causes of a problem that are often the result of a traumatic episode,” said Galda.
The move to Florida was followed by the dissolution (on Hallowe’en of 2017) of a small business, Galda Holdings, LLC, that Mrs. Galda operated together with her husband, the plumber James Galda. The business was located at 15 Sand Hill Road in Sandy Hook, which may have involved the rental of a cottage situated on the property near the main house.
On exactly the same day as Bennett’s sale (June 11, 2018), Charles Galda (James’s brother) sold his home in Brookfield. It appears that the Charles Galdas have moved to New Hampshire. Charles shared his sister-in-law Catherine Galda’s interests in charity work. More about that below.
These may all be mere coincidences; we are merely noting them.
A General Electric connection. Charles lived not far from Newtown at the time when Shannon Hicks was photographing conga lines. But Charles is no plumber. According to his LinkedIn profile, he is Chief Information Officer of Technology Centers and Services, with global responsibility for GE Capital’s Technology Centers.
He has also been on the Technology Board of Danbury Hospital, where two children were allegedly brought and died after the purported massacre. (We never learned these children’s names.)
A charitable history. Why should an upper-level executive position with GE be of interest to SH researchers? Obviously, there is the fact that Adam Lanza’s father, Peter Lanza, was a higher-up at the light bulb company: VP of GE Capital as well as serving as a partner at Ernst & Young.**
More important, after 12/14/12, GE loaned expert employees to Newtown Town Hall to help manage all of the charitable donations and generally run things for a year. This reeks of corporatism, but no one seemed to mind. GE had already chipped in $15MM to help manage the overflow of charitable gifts.
With GE then situated in Fairfield and Stamford, and hundreds of high-level employees living in and around Newtown, giving them a place at the table must have seemed perfectly natural to town managers. Hadn’t the corporation earned its right to oversee the Sandy Hook charity ball? (See: https://www.sandyhookpromise.org/gala.) GE executives have sat on the boards of local charities for decades.
Charles Galda may be working elsewhere, having sold his Brookfield home in June 2018. Whatever the case may be, Charles, like his sister-in-law, left behind a record of notable charitable interests, including Walnut Hill Community Church (Bethel, CT) and the Center of Hope (Haiti). Out of curiosity spurred by Galda’s corporate and familial associations, we took a gander at both.
Walnut Hill Community Church, Bethel. This evangelical assembly, only a few miles from Newtown, is where Galda has served as an elder and member of the board of directors. In 2013, the church ran into some trouble in the form of civil suits on allegations of sexual abuse of a minor due to negligence by members of the church’s youth leadership. The perpetrator had already been arrested and sentenced in 2010. The 2013 complaint targeted the church itself, the senior pastor, the pastor of community life, the youth pastor and a former elder. Galda was not named, nor has he commented to our knowledge. We weren’t able to determine the outcome of these charges.
Center of Hope, Haiti. Charles Galda also lists among his accomplishments his service as a volunteer treasurer and director of the Center of Hope Haiti, Inc., which has somewhat straitened-looking headquarters in Stamford CT at 22 Vista Street. If you zero in on the sign, you’ll see that the building is owned by an establishment called the French-speaking Baptist Church.
Oddly, the above entry (from Charity Navigator) lists the location as Middlebury, CT, not Stamford. Upon clicking the MORE INFO button, we found that the address there is a post office box: PO BOX 1150, MIDDLEBURY, CT 06762-1150. Hm? Why doesn’t the mail go to the Vista Street, Stamford address?
The distance between Stamford and Middlebury is 53 miles. Why not a P.O. box in Stamford? It just seems odd. And odder still is another mailing address for the charity on the opposite end of the continent, in Orinda, California.
You can find some of the financials on the Center of Hope at this link. For instance:
A focus on Hispaniola. Haiti and the Dominican Republic share the Caribbean island known as Hispaniola, roughly dividing it into halves, with a bit more turf on the Haitian side. It is a vortex of weather woes, disease and poverty, as well as slavery and human trafficking. See the following links:
Hispaniola has been a focus for charity-minded former residents of Connecticut’s western region. Besides Center of Hope, we discovered two other charities with peculiar links to names that readers will recognize from the Sandy Hook incident. We present such facts as we were able to find not in order to accuse anyone of anything, but simply because we found the stories to be instructive, involving odd coincidences and unfortunate twists of fate.
This charity is described as “a non-profit, secular, and non-political entity focused on universal principles of human rights, social justice, and community service in the bateyes of the Dominican Republic.” Batey is said to provide scholarships, community support, work and cultural exchange services.
“Bateyes” are settlements around sugar mills, found in impoverished places like Cuba and the Dominican Republic. The foundation takes its name from this odd word. But it was another name that first drew our attention.
George Hochsprung’s first wife. Mr. Hochsprung was the third husband of Dawn Hochsprung, the former principal of Sandy Hook Elementary. His first wife, Janet (Walzer) Smith, works/worked at the foundation, as stated on her Facebook page.
The Batey Foundation is the brainchild of Janet Walzer Smith’s ex-son-in-law, Joshua “Sweat” Lawton, who was married to Amy Hochsprung, Janet and George’s daughter. Amy worked at White Mountain School in New Hampshire and, oddly, the address of that school is identical to that of the Batey Foundation.
Joshua Lawton is something of a social justice warrior according to his bio: “… he focused his studies on the enlightenment thinkers and changing ideas of equality, political independence, and personal freedom. Over the years Josh’s interests evolved into how existing economic, political and social structures affect the human condition, specifically in the world’s poorest regions.” It must be difficult working for such an ex-son-in-law.
The Batey Foundation was founded in 2009. See its Facebook page here. For the Batey Foundation’s IRS information, go here. Interesting. And, as far as we can tell, nothing seems to be unusual at the Foundation apart from having its offices tucked away in another small New England school.
Health e Children International, Inc., 11 Orchard Lane, Ridgefield, CT
Of the charities we examined, Health e Children wins the blue ribbon for odd bedfellows and eerie coincidences. In some ways, it’s a ghost story, because the charity died an ignominious death.
Here are two screen shots we obtained while the page was still up:
As shown, the Health e Children FB photo album contained pictures of Ugandan and Haitian people and scenes. The foundation was started on Dec. 21, 2005 by a once-married couple, both of them children’s healthcare professionals (Jens Haerter, physician’s assistant, and Patricia Jorquera, Board-certified pediatrician) in a modest-looking house in Ridgefield, CT. At the same address, the couple operated an entity known as Healtheclinic, Inc., a pediatric practice established to assist the “under-served.”
You can read about both foundations by clicking this link. Information about an Ecuadoran offshoot can be found at this link.
The strange case of the Burberry counterfeit lawsuit. Health e Children seems to have languished rather suddenly after being named as one of hundreds of defendants in a major lawsuit by Burberry Limited, the famous UK garment company. The charity’s website URL was replaced by this link. It led to this page, a notice of the lawsuit:
The complaint alleges that the defendants were caught selling counterfeit Burberry merchandise. See this link.
“Huh?” we asked. Must be some kind of mistake. But we checked the list of defendants at this link.
And, sure enough, there it was among hundreds of Chinese surnames and businesses with the word “cheap” in their names: Health e Children, number 632 on page 41.
Some context: Burberry apparently went on the warpath against counterfeiters as a 12/05/2012 Huffington Post article attests. (Note that date – the Sandy Hook event took place 9 days later. Just a coincidence, but interesting.)
From the article: “What lesson did we learn this week, class? Don’t rip off Burberry. Burberry was awarded $100 million in damages this week as Manhattan Federal court laid down the law on an extensive counterfeiting network.”
(The Huff piece attests that the Chinese were heavily involved in this case. In Feb. 2016, Burberry was in court again, this time to sue J.C. Penney Co., Inc. for copying its iconic check pattern.)
So, why was Health e Children named as a defendant in a counterfeit fabric suit? And why is that of interest to SH researchers? Once again, there is a befuddling and totally unexpected Hochsprung connection.
Janet (Walzer) Hochsprung ran a quilt shop out of 5 Front Street in Bethel, CT, as well as renting the apartments on the other side of the building (1,3 Elizabeth Street, Bethel, CT and, catty-corner, 101 Elizabeth Street, Bethel, CT) from January 2002 until at least 2008. (This info comes from the Bethel Tax Assessor’s record and BBB records, corroborated by other sources.)
The shop had multiple names over its duration (which went beyond 2008), including:
JH Homestead Quilts
JH Homestead Quilting
The Bethel tax assessor’s office confirmed that there had been two owners of the Bethel, CT shop, although they never clarified whether these owners were partners or whether Janet (Walzer) Hochsprung sold the shop to the other owner, whose name is Vivian Hultgren. We also later found much evidence that Vivian Hultgren ran the shop beyond 2010.
Church ladies were recruited to sew frocks for poor Haitian children. We found evidence that the Bethel quilt shop advertised regularly for women to join a sewing circle that benefited Haitian children. In 2011, for instance, according to her FB page (https://www.facebook.com/HomesteadQuilts/), Vivian Hultgren recruited women (church ladies) to sew frocks for a charity. You can guess which one it was: Health e Children International.
Were the frocks made from counterfeit Burberry fabric and sold, rather than being donated to poor children? It’s just one of our questions.
Other questions were answered by one of the church ladies, whose name we are keeping anonymous for obvious reasons. She told us that two marathon sewing sessions took place at her church to benefit children in Haiti. The seamstresses made “children’s dresses and shorts.” The sewing sessions were coordinated with “a local group of doctors” (she couldn’t remember their names) who, she says, “took the clothes directly to Haiti” to benefit the children.
“They didn’t ship the clothes,” she said. “They actually took them directly to Haiti.”
On December 31, 2013 (a year after the Burberry lawsuit), the Homestead Quilts shop in Bethel, CT closed suddenly with only six days notice. And, on January 1, 2014, a website for a quilt shop with an identical name popped up in LaPine, Oregon – just 30 miles from Bend, Oregon, where this article’s inauspicious first paragraphs begin.
In February 2015, Vivian Hultgren was alleged to have died under circumstances that remain suspicious. We have no idea where the fabric bolts went, or the frocks, or the Burberry labels.
An Americares connection. From this link we learned the following:
“AmeriCares of Stamford has signed on to help HealtheClinic by donating medicine for the clinic.”
From the website above we found: “Primary Care: a) Expand access to primary health services for low-income communities at AmeriCares Free Clinics serving the uninsured in Connecticut, at our comprehensive family clinic in rural El Salvador, and through mobile medical units in the slums of Mumbai, India.”
It seems that AmeriCares is very involved in serving the poor in Connecticut: “AmeriCares Free Clinics provide primary health care to the uninsured in Connecticut. Three clinics in Bridgeport, Norwalk and Danbury offer medical services to thousands of residents every year, thanks to the work of dedicated and committed volunteer doctors, nurses, interpreters and administrative personnel.”
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AmeriCares
The road to Haiti is paved with Clinton connections.*** We mustn’t forget that the Clintons were instrumental in getting kidnapper Laura Silsby released after she was found guilty of illegally taking Haitian children away from their families. See this article.
From the article: “Of the Americans only Silsby was prosecuted, convicted, and released with “time served” although the prosecutor had recommended a six month sentence. Silsby was originally charged with kidnapping and criminal association, reduced to one count of arranging illegal travel.”
From the linked article: “Monica Petersen was in Haiti working for the Human Trafficking Center and also previously worked for the Colorado Human Trafficking Council’s Data & Research Task Force. She died a few days ago under suspicious circumstances. Her friends on Facebook are looking for answers. Several close friends have made mentions on various FB posts that friends and family have no clear understanding of what happened to Monica except that she died on Sunday.”
Other commentary from Petersen’s community can be found on FB here.
Blind faith, hope and charity. The charitable impulse is one of humanity’s most prized. In addition to being a virtue much extolled in the Bible, it is the universal voluntary and spontaneous expression of human compassion. Without it, we doubt very much that the human species would have made it this far. While we are not suggesting that charity had a twisted underside in all of the cases examined in this post, we are asking readers to take the closer look that such matters deserve.
And while we are in an asking mode, please also consider that humans under the influence of their best impulses – compassion, empathy, charity, etc. – are often least equipped to ask the right questions. That is why incidents such as Sandy Hook are quicksand for clear cognition. Most people simply cannot offer even a narrow seat to the critic within when the heart is occupying most of the floor space. The curious thing is that, in the case of Sandy Hook, this blind faith has been going on for years. “This is who we are.” But is it? We hope this post will, in a small and compassionate way, help to heal the blind.
*Note how the words “resilience” and “resiliency” are gaining in popularity. To learn more about so-called “resilient cities,” go here for an interview of Deborah Tavares (of StoptheCrime.net) who knows the score on this subject:
Her point is that as long as the public perceives our country as being in a “state of national emergency,” people will accept infringements on our Constitutional rights and will succumb to the effects of psychological, nutritional, biological, climate and chemical poisoning. The point is to keep people in a constant state of psychological emergency and biological stress, so they are easier to control. Although Tavares talks mostly about biological, technological, climate and chemical controls, we are positing here that the psychological controls via false flags and hoaxes are all part of the same plan.
**On Dec. 16, 2012, Peter Lanza was called to testify in the “Libor Scandal,” in which banks were said to lie about interest rates to beef up their credit-worthiness:
“The Libor scandal was an event that saw banks lie about interest rate information to make themselves look more creditworthy. The Libor is a calculated average interest rate and used to give an average of the health of the overall economy. Obviously, dishonesty by the banks would affect the Libor rate and the corresponding financial view of citizens. Companies colluded to affect the Libor rate in the hopes that it would result in more business. Student loans and mortgages are just two of the financial products that would have been affected by the manipulation of the Libor rate.”
Note: This article is based on collaborative research by Anne Berg, Alison Maynard and the author. For many readers, it will be a rehash. Its value, we believe, lies in evidence that the mainstream media and other official sources effectively confused the public with misleading photography and contradiction concerning the timeline of events. It appears that we are supposed to overlook these blatant contradictions in timeline and testimony in order to accept the official narrative. ~C.
The Greek word “labyrinthos” is translated in the Online Etymology Dictionary as a “ ‘…large building with intricate passages,’ especially the structure built by Daedelus to hold the Minotaur, near Knossos in Crete.” The word’s ancestor, labrys, means a “double-edged axe,” which was associated with royal power.
We can think of no better metaphor for the Sandy Hook phenomenon, both in relation to the central mythos of the school itself – a shabby brick structure whose corridors and doors had supernatural logic- and physics-defying powers – as well as the Sandy Hook story, an elaborate maze by any reckoning. And, of course, we have the Minotaur, who is the Obamaniac deep state in the guise of Adam Lanza.
So down we went again through those haunted, gone-without-a-trace halls, this time to a door from which a class of second graders is said to have issued, escaping the Minotaur and becoming part of Sandy Hook’s photographic icon.
To enter this door, we first needed to visit the CT State Police report files for whatever information we could gather in between heavy redactions.
And, as luck would have it, we hit pay dirt; that is to say, a lot of the dirt had already been thoroughly turned over by a researcher writing pseudonymously as “Sandy Hooked” at sandyhooked.wordpress.com. To give credit where it’s due, “Sandy Hooked” has a golden shovel, turning up some choice nuggets in the unwieldy and labyrinthine CT State Police report files. Wherever “Sandy Hooked” has dug, Doubters have surely benefited.
However, a caveat: we believe that “Sandy Hooked” may not be operating on his/her own and may, in fact, be “working for the opposition,” trawling for reactions from the Sandy Hooked Doubter community. This is, admittedly, conjecture based on several observations; among other things, Sandy Hooked is working on a domain hosted by WordPress, which did a major takedown of Sandy Hook Doubter web sites this past August. Yet, “Sandy Hooked” lingers, one of the few non-casualties.1 (If we are wrong about our conjecture, we would welcome the evidence. We believe in giving credit where it’s due.)
In any case, we call readers’ attention to this prolific site with the above caveat and the additional observation that many of “Sandy Hooked’s” analyses are as labyrinthine and murky as the Sandy Hook story itself.
The double doors of Room #5. Sandy Hook Elementary’s Room #5 was situated in the moldy northeast corridor of the school. Unlike other classrooms that we explored in Parts 1 and 2, it had a main doorknob capable of being locked from the inside and outside, and on the fateful day that outside doorknob was locked, according to the state police.
Above: Interior plan of the old Sandy Hook Elementary school; red arrow on Room #5 is the author’s.
But even more unusual, Room #5 was connected to Room #3 by an inside door. (This is corroborated by the State’s Attorney Report — page 22 online; page 18 in print). That inside door was also locked. According to Sandy Hooked’s research, Room #5 was the only classroom with this fortuitous arrangement. As you will see, it made possible a purported rescue and “evacuation” from the school, as chronicled in two photographs beloved by Sandy Hook true believers and the mainstream media.
Room #5 couldn’t be cleared until police broke into it. But instead of breaking in through the locked main door, police chose to break through the locked inside door, from Room #3.
The breach of the inside door was noted by police in writing on the wall next to Room #3, instead of the wall nearest the breached door.
Room #5 was barricaded by police later, reportedly the only classroom to be treated this way.
Some of the police testimony makes no mention of breaching the inside door. Two examples cited by Sandy Hooked follow:
CFS 1200704559 Book 6 000199903 p.2 “I then ran back inside and met with TFC Cournoyer and TFC Cipriano. We then went to room #5. Upon entry to this room we found a room of children and their teacher huddled in the coat area of the room.”
CFS 1200704559 Book 6 00011235 p.2 “I assumed the right flank position and cleared the next two rooms (classroom #7 then classroom #5) teachers and children were escorted out of these rooms and sent toward the exit near the lobby.”
A Room #5 mother who eluded the Minotaur. Among Room #5’s mysteries is one concerning a mother who should have had a close brush with Adam Lanza, but mysteriously did not. (A hat tip to Sandy Hooked for clueing us in to this one, although s/he doesn’t link the incident to Room #5 as we are doing here.)
The story goes like this: On the morning of 12-14-12, around 9:30, a mother is said to have gone to the school to drop off a letter for one “Mrs. Taylor” that her child had written but left at home. (Mrs. Taylor was the Room #5 second-grade teacher, as we shall discuss later.)
The letter is said to have contained the child’s apology for “cheating.” (The mother’s statement is found here in the CT State Police report: CFS 1200704559 Book 5 00005519).
Although the mother’s name is redacted, the Visitor log confirms the allegation. See below:
(From “The Impossible Timeline,” sandyhooked.wordpress.com; red rectangle is by Sandy Hooked.)
The mother’s testimony also includes the following:
The mother left the Sandy Hook parking lot at 9:34 a.m. (The first active shooter report is said to have come in to Newtown and Connecticut emergency fire and law enforcement radio dispatch at 9:35:52. – Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, p. 255)
The mother saw no passing cars on her way in or out. Given the above, how is this possible? How did she not cross paths with Lanza the Minotaur?
The mother saw nothing odd or out of place.
The mother saw an older gentleman dressed in dark clothing inside the school, shuffling around with his hands in his pockets while walking toward the first grade classrooms. (These would be Rooms 8, 10, 12, or 50 and 52). Hooked thinks the man was the father who was there for a gingerbread-house-making event. This would be Chris Manfredonia. But Manfredonia was only 41 at the time, and not likely to be discerned as “elderly” or “shuffling.” Did Manfredonia sign in that day? Another unsolved mystery.
So, who was in Room #5, anyway? It isn’t a question that the otherwise inquisitive Sandy Hooked has posed, but we are posing and answering it here.
Room #5 was a second-grade classroom led by teacher Amy Brackett Taylor. According to this article from Bend Bulletin, the children in Room #5 were those who made up the famous “conga line” photographed by Shannon Hicks for the Newtown Bee. We suggest that you pause here to read the article. (And when you do, please notice the little girl referred to as “a peanut” dressed in a pink top. More about this in Part 4.)
Just to clarify: We can safely assume, based on the Bend article, that the conga line was supposed to have issued from the doors of Room #5.
You might wonder why such a dramatic rescue – which involved the breach of an interior door – was never reported in reference to the famous conga line. Why not? The mainstream media, typically poised like a jackal to seize such opportunities, must have slept through this one.
Now let’s turn our attention to the photographer of that moment in time when the conga line emerged before an audience of casually dressed, relaxed-looking parents.
Did Ms. Hicks hiccup? According to this Time.com article, Shannon Hicks, a Newtown Bee associate editor and photographer, photographed the evacuation described above at 10:09 a.m. on 12-14-12:
“At 10:09 am, 10 minutes after she [Hicks] climbed out of her vehicle, she snapped the shutter on an elementary school class being led out of the school by two Connecticut State Police officers.”
Here is the iconic photo that purportedly resulted of children being shepherded by police to the neighboring firehouse. (Children’s faces have been blacked out to protect their identity.)
The “Iconic” Photo. Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP
The Time.com statement about the 10:09 shutter click is debatable, however, because of a slideshow that Hicks made from 20 of her photos and released on YouTube. Note that this slideshow is said to have been posted on December 14, 2012.
In Nobody Died at Sandy Hook (pages 124-125 online; pages 76-77 in print) Vivian Lee writes that the slideshow was discovered to have been uploaded at 5:44 p.m., Dec. 13, 2012, then made public on Dec. 14.
The evidence for Ms. Lee’s allegation is provided in this video by “QKUltra.” Cinderella et al. aren’t techies, but we present this as credible evidence.
Screen shot above is by QKUltra, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uCOd7r4cfA
(In case this vid vanishes, just search for Newtown Bee Stinger, YouTube. QKUltra is very good about mirroring his vids, and has been doing so for years.)
If the timing of the video is off, so is much else. Compare the iconic photo with a similar one from the slideshow (as before, children’s faces have been blacked out):
The Casual Parents. Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP
The length of the shadows show that the photo couldn’t have been taken at 10:00 a.m., but must have been taken much earlier in the morning. On 12-14-12, the temperature was below freezing2 at the time this shadow pattern would have been plausible, in which case, we might expect to see vapor issuing from mouths and frost on the ground.
There has been online speculation that the little girl in the aqua blue shirt (in the “iconic” photo) is yawning, not screaming, consistent with an early morning shot.
The photos appear to have been staged in order to get the best shot – with parents looking on, their casual body language inconsistent with a recent act of terror. The photos feature different lineups of some of the same kids, but with others missing in one photo. For example, the little girl wearing a pale pink top and skirt in the photo above is not in the “iconic” photo.
All of the above oddities have been noted by other researchers. To these we can add one more:
If all of these second graders came out of Room #5, wouldn’t all of them be in both photos? It would seem unconscionable for the police to have left some of these helpless innocents behind (with their eyes closed as they passed through a hall containing dead bodies), while escorting another group out first.
More slideshow hits. Let’s take a look at another photo that Shannon Hicks placed on her slideshow.
Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP
Note how these cars are parked very close the SHES building wall, two cars deep. If, indeed, they were parked there on 12-14-12 at 10:00 a.m., where was Adam Lanza’s car? It was supposed to have been parked up against the same wall behind police tape. Compare the above photo, purportedly taken after the massacre at around 10:00 a.m. with the ones below of Lanza’s car behind police tape on 12-14-12, before it was towed away.
Above Photo: Meehan, CT State Police Report, Parking Lot Photo #16
REUTERS/Connecticut State Police/Handout via Reuters
Here’s an aerial view of Lanza’s car:
Photo Credit: MSNBC
Below is yet another view of the same area in the parking lot, with a foursome running away from the school. (The child’s face has been blacked out to protect her identity.)
The Running Foursome.Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP
You might ask why the policeman is running away, instead of rounding up more teachers and students. And why do the vehicles in back of the foursome appear out of proportion – rather too large? Once again, they’re parked very close to the building, two cars deep, leaving no apparent room for the Sandy Hook Minotaur’s black Honda.
Ask yourself if the above parking arrangements are anything like the one captured on 12-14-12 by CNN below:
We think it’s plain to see: The line-up of cars behind the four running people doesn’t match the aerial photo, either.
The simplest and most logical reason why the black Honda doesn’t appear in the previous photos is because it wasn’t there. We propose that the reason it wasn’t there is because the iconic and slideshow photos were taken on a previous date. This is consistent with the evidence in QKUltra’s video, which attests that the photos were uploaded on 12-13-12.
The photos were later used to substantiate an “evacuation” of second-graders from Mrs. Amy Taylor’s Room #5. In other words, we have reason to believe that the photos were staged. And if those photos were staged, we can safely assume that everything was.
Who’s who? It may be important to identify some of the adults in the photos that Shannon Hicks took. (The square-ups that follow are screen shots from those photos.) Obviously, not everyone can be positively identified. But here is a brief rundown of some principals:
Leading the lineup was Rachael Van Ness. Currently assigned to the Western District Major Crime Squad out of the Southbury Troop Barracks, she is also said to have served with the CT state police in this link. Mrs. Van Ness has a LinkedIn profile that also credits her for work as a “self-employed” “detective” as well as “writing and editing.” In this report, she is quoted as having apologized to Newtown families for not providing the CT state police reports “in advance of the release as we had always planned.” Timing is everything with Sandy Hook.
Although not caught on Hicks’s camera (to our knowledge), Officer Ed Benecchi is also credited with arranging the conga line outside of the school. From this article: “ ‘I told them we were going to play follow the leader and whoever kept their eyes closed would win,’ Trooper First Class Edward Benecchi wrote.”
We don’t know for a certainty whether the face at left (from the iconic photo) belongs to Amy Brackett Taylor, Room #5’s second-grade teacher. But she certainly does resemble the woman on the far left in a photograph at this link, identified as such. And her casual-Friday attire (white top, beige sweater, blue jeans) looks like the same ensemble worn by the woman at the far left in the photo of the running foursome:
So, why would Mrs. Taylor (or whoever the woman is) appear in two photos showing such disparate emotions? In the first, she appears calm and in control. In the second, she appears to be running for her life with a look of anguish. Which photo came first? And was this woman involved in two rescues or just one? Cinderella et al. admit to utter bafflement.
Mrs. Taylor is still teaching school in Newtown; however, to date, we could find no statements by her about the conga line, the breach of Room #5’s interior door, or Sandy Hook Elementary.
Not so in the case of another Amy Taylor associated with the St. Rose of Lima School, who made public statements about 12-14-12. Go here for more on the other Taylor.
This woman’s back is turned to the camera in the slideshow photo, but we believe that she may be the same woman in another dramatic photo that appeared (on December 14, 2012) in The Atlantic Monthly, heading up an article by Emily Chertoff (Michael C’s daughter). The blue jacket and size of the woman (click the link above) led us to this conclusion.
The children she is comforting in the Atlantic photo are Henry and Kelly Terifay, whom you can see identified if you go here. The woman in the blue jacket may be their mother, Lisa Papp Terifay.
We were unable to identify this dark-haired woman at left (from the “iconic” photo) dressed in blue stripes, wearing glasses. But what’s interesting is her resemblance to the dark-haired woman wearing blue stripes (but no glasses) in the “Running Foursome” photo, below. We have the same questions about this pairing as we do about the “Mrs. Taylor” photos.
Camera-shy. Let’s go back in time – to the Time.com article that examined the photos Shannon Hicks took on the fateful day. We call your attention to this excerpt from that article (bolded italics are mine):
“Regarding her photograph’s popularity — for lack of a better term — Hicks said it came as a surprise and brings little personal relief. It is the cache of photographs buried on her camera’s memory card, she said, that are hardest to look at and impossible to forget.”
Now let’s move forward a few months to March 25, 2013. That’s when James Tracy contacted Shannon Hicks to ask her about the availability of her photo cache. See the account below from page 305 of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook:
March 25 8:59AM
Newtown Bee Associate Editor Shannon Hicks responds to query from memoryholeblog on whether the multiple photographs she took at Sandy Hook Elementary as the shooting transpired have been shared with law enforcement or will at any time be made publicly available.
“The photos I took on 12/14 have not been shared with anyone,” Hicks said in an email. “We have no plans to do so, either. I would appreciate it if you consider this our final contact,” she continued. “I have enough work to do without getting involved in the kind of ‘research’ that continues to hurt those who live in Newtown.”
Shannon Hicks to James Tracy /Memoryholeblog.com [email in possession of author], March 25, 2013.
“Hurt those who live in Newtown”? Why would the release of “buried” photos “hurt” people who never seem to duck when a camera is in the room, creating as many photo-ops as their calendars can accommodate, writing books and reminding the public endlessly of the Sandy Hook experience?
Unless, of course, the buried photos would drag up issues similar to those explored in this blogpost.
The double-axe. As discussed at the top of this post, the origin of the word “labyrinth” is a tough little root that means “double axe,” associated with royalty. It’s our opinion, based on the above, that the Sandy Hook “royal family” wielded a psychological axe of dual timelines and dual roles for participants in the masque. Unless you see the duplicity for what it is – half-mockery, half-illusion – you are doomed to wander the maze forever, searching in vain for the exit door.
H/T: “Sandy Hooked”
1Shortly after this post was published, Sandy Hooked’s site was removed by WordPress. For an account of the takedown, visit Sandy Hooked’s new site here: https://sandyhooked.wixsite.com/investigate/beware-all-sandy-hook-skeptics. Based on this evidence, Cinderella leans toward the belief that “Sandy Hooked” is a genuine truth seeker, although his/her conclusions may differ from those of many other earnest researchers. Sandy Hooked’s effort has been prodigious and worthy of note.
2 The temperatures in the link are from neighboring Danbury on 12-14-12. Be sure to click on the View button, then scroll down to Daily Observations for Fri Dec 14 2012. Not until 8:53 a.m. EST did recorded temperatures rise to 34 degrees F. All other recorded temperatures before that time are below freezing.
Note: This article is based on collaborative research by Anne Berg, Alison Maynard and the author. For many readers, it will be a rehash. Its value, we believe, lies in evidence that the mainstream media and other official sources effectively confused the public with misleading information. It appears that we are supposed to accept the official sources’ many blunders and mistakes as “human error” while remaining convinced that only establishment media are qualified interpreters and reporters of the 12-14-12 incident. ~C.
In Ian McEwan’s novel Atonement, the rough (very rough) draft of a love letter is read by the younger sister of its intended recipient. The ensuing misinterpretations spell disaster for the writer, who is wrongfully accused and imprisoned for rape.
One misinterpreted letter can cause serious repercussions – as true in life as in art.
This is about such a letter. But in this case, the victims are the readers.
Many Sandy Hook researchers have asked why there is no surveillance footage of Adam Lanza as he blasted his way through the SHES front entrance window. From page 24 of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook:
“For example, in an era of ubiquitous video surveillance of public buildings especially no visual evidence of Lanza’s violent entry has emerged.”
Memory Hole Blog recently reposted a series of articles by James R. Hanson, an attorney with a long and distinguished record. Hanson gives as evidence for a hoax the lack of any crime scene photos. He refers specifically to a “new door camera system” installed in the fall before the alleged shooting:
“A coincidence that struggles for credence is that the new door camera system, proudly announced when installed last fall, did not record an assailant shooting through the glass entryway door and plunging inside. There is also no photograph of this door. Has it been replaced? If so, may we see the door that was in place that day? Do the school financial records show the cost of purchase and installation of a replacement?”
Wolfgang Halbig asked that same question and prepared FOIA requests to obtain work orders for the system. Ultimately, Halbig found himself the subject of organized mockery and persecution. Persistence is not treated as a virtue when it knocks on the devil’s door.
Yet, the question raised by all three of the above inquiring minds was perfectly legitimate. It was spurred, in part, by multiple mainstream media articles that describe the implementation of a front entrance security system still being tested, based on a letter said to have been written by Dawn Hochsprung herself. (Mrs. Hochsprung was the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary, allegedly one of Adam Lanza’s first victims.)
A letter with a long beard. A conscientious search on the Web turns up numerous articles by news sources that mention the system installation and/or Mrs. Hochsprung’s letter, among them:
One of the earliest articles to reference Mrs. Hochsprung’s letter comes from the CBS News article (posted at 7:05 p.m., 12-14-12), which reproduced it in full. See the letter below in quotes (boldface is mine):
“Dear Members of our Sandy Hook Family,
“Our district will be implementing a security system in all elementary schools as part of our ongoing efforts to ensure student safety. As usual, exterior doors will be locked during the day. Every visitor will be required to ring the doorbell at the front entrance and the office staff will use a visual monitoring system to allow entry. Visitors will still be required to report directly to the office and sign in. If our office staff does not recognize you, you will be required to show identification with a picture id. Please understand that with nearly 700 students and over 1000 parents representing 500 SHS families, most parents will be asked to show identification.
“Doors will be locked at approximately 9:30 a.m. Any student arriving after that time must be walked into the building and signed in at the office. Before that time our regular drop-off procedures will be in place. I encourage all parents to have their children come to school and return home on the bus and to remain in school for the entire school day. The beginning and ending of our school day are also important instructional times and therefore we want all our students to reap the benefits of full participation in our program.
“We need your help and cooperation for our system to work effectively. Our office staff is handling multiple tasks. Though they will work diligently to help you into the building as quickly as possible, there may be a short delay until someone can view you on the handset and allow you to come in electronically. There are times during the day when office personnel are on the telephone, addressing student concerns, or in the copy room; there are other times when only one person is in the front office. Please help our staff by identifying yourself and provide your child’s name.
‘Keep in mind we will be following our district guidelines which may need revision once we test the system.
“Please know your involvement continues to be critical to our school’s effectiveness and your child’s success. We continue to encourage and value your presence in our classrooms and are counting on your cooperation with the implementation of this safety initiative.
The letter contains all of the clues necessary to prove that the front entry system was not new, was not capable of surveillance, nor was it the fruit of efforts by “Mrs. Hochsprung.”
1. “700 students”: Four days before the alleged Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, during a Newtown Board of Finance meeting, a report was provided, dated October 1, 2012, with head counts for all of the schools. See below: the SHES head count is listed as 454 students.
In the State’s Attorney Report, we find on page 9, footnote #13 the following: “On December 13, 2012, the student enrollment was 489. Official attendance had not yet been recorded as of 9:30 a.m. on December 14, 2012.”
However, a CityData page provides a census of 776 students at SHES for the year 2006. A lot closer to the “700” mark. This is a big hint that the letter probably wasn’t written in 2012, but much earlier, when the SHES census was up.
2. “Visual monitoring system.” This means a camera of some sort connected to a “handset” through which people could be observed. There’s no mention of a recording device.
3. “Mrs. Hochsprung.” Dawn Hochsprung usually signed with her full name and title, as shown (from the Sandy Hook Elementary School Handbook, 2010) below. The signature line on the above letter creates the impression that it was a prefab letter generated each year as a reminder, likely in a student rulebook.
The letter was likely written in 2007 by a previous SHES principal (Donna Page). In a 2007 annual report for the Newtown Board of Education (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3-vhpZ_3PTLOHZicm9UTFhuWUE/view), an expenditure of $4,322 was made for a “front entry security” system for Sandy Hook Elementary. The same amount was invested in systems for the Hawley School and Head O’ Meadow School. This is probably the system described in the letter by “Mrs. Hochsprung.” Not a new system, but a relatively old one.
More conflicting information from official sources. Oddly, the State’s Attorney Report (p. 21, following the pagination in upper left) refers to an elderly call box installed in 2005, not 2007. It describes a “camera,” but specifies that it was only for “monitoring,” not “recording.” Convenient.
It’s clear that the letter from “Mrs. Hochsprung” was old, creating multiple misperceptions. Was it fed to the media for that purpose? A non-existent surveillance camera could distract investigators from other glaring inconsistencies and anomalies, such as the doors of Room 5. (More about that in a future article.)
Or did the media find the letter and just spring on it, possibly to make the point that even a security system is no match for a lunatic with a gun?
One thing that’s certain is that a decrepit, shuttered school doesn’t need a new surveillance or monitoring system. In fact, the absence of one facilitated what I believe was a hoax.
Another letter. We also know that Dawn Hochsprung was a real fan of security technology thanks to another (undated) letter that her friend Gerald Stomski wrote to the Connecticut School Safety Committee, apparently sometime after 12-14-12. (See “Somebody who really died after Sandy Hook” for more on Mr. Stomski’s tragic death.) Here is an excerpt:
“In 2009 when I was elected as to [sic] the CEO for the Town of Woodbury, I met with then Principal Dawn Hochsprung regarding her writing a grant for security upgrades at Mitchell Elementary School. I questioned at the time, why were school administrators applying for and ultimately setting up security measures for their respected schools. Without possessing the necessary background in the fields of security and safety, I wondered if this was the most logical way of protecting our schools. Upon further investigation it was revealed to me that not only were administrators responsible for this activity, but that school maintenance workers, janitors, teachers and school administrators were responsible for these safety controls. Questionable decisions at best.
“I worked with Dawn Hochsprung on writing a successful grant and assisted her with the proper application and installations of these security controls for her school. Additionally, Dawn Hochsprung and I formed a relationship whereas we discussed on numerous occasions, what would need to be done should a shooter breach the school security, forcibly entering the school, and open firing once entered. Our discussions led to “trying to buy time” to “notify school teachers, staff and students that eminent [sic] danger was in their school”. Dawn and I even had discussions regarding “giving up your life” should it be necessary to protect her school and her children. She stated, “NOT ON MY WATCH”, would anyone be able to enter her school to conduct an act of violence against her school.”
Why settle? Given all of the above, why would Dawn Hochsprung, principal of SHES since 2010, settle for an inadequate security system for her school? Through no fault of her own, she inherited a monitoring system with no recording capability, as well as vintage 1956 windows that weren’t bulletproof at an entrance that was like a fishbowl. But given her proactive stance at Mitchell Elementary (Woodbury), why didn’t she follow suit at Sandy Hook?
Why settle for classroom doorknobs that locked only from the outside? Wouldn’t doorknob replacements be an expenditure that Mrs. Hochsprung would champion, given her past experience in obtaining security controls?
A building loaded with asbestos and black mold was bad enough. If building repairs were needed at SHES, the presence of these contaminants would have posed serious health risks. Given this, it’s fortunate indeed that – as stated in a Newtown school system report – the allotted budget for SHES building repairs for 2011-2012 was exactly $0.
Keyhole. To conclude, the letter signed by Mrs. Hochsprung was ultimately misleading. But the one signed by Gerald Stomski raises the questions we should have been asking all along about the doors at Sandy Hook Elementary.
Note: This article is based on collaborative research by Anne Berg, Alison Maynard and the author. For many readers, it will be a rehash. Its value, we believe, lies in evidence that the mainstream media and other official sources effectively confused the public with contradictory reports and photographic overload, on the one hand, and photographic obscurity on the other. It appears that we are supposed to attribute the official sources’ many blunders and mistakes to human error while remaining convinced that only establishment media are qualified interpreters and reporters of the 12-14-12 incident. ~C.
The doors at the Sandy Hook Elementary School were once subjects for rigorous discussion. Think back to those early days when controversy raged over locked bathroom doors and front entrance door cameras. But like Huxley’s “doors of perception,” Sandy Hook’s seem to have had a hallucinatory effect on most, supplanting critical thought with a one-way trip to oblivion.
Those peek-a-boo port-holed classroom doors, for instance, that could only be locked from the outside. How inconvenient if you’re attempting to keep a raging lunatic out. Yet, how convenient if you’re shooting for a particular mortality outcome while constructing a scene from a thriller.
Sandy Hook’s interior doors were perfect for the plot. You could easily picture Adam Lanza’s goggle eyes (with or without sunglasses?), Beatle helmet hair and cartilaginous neck framed in those windows, like a mescaline-induced nightmare.
With the horror behind the doors in the spotlight, the bass-ackwards locking mechanisms were mostly ignored (apparently by safety-conscious SHES Principal Dawn Hochsprung as well as the sleepy-headed public), until the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission recommended that school hardware should lock from inside. You have to marvel at such blinding hindsight.
ABOVE: Room 12 door handles at the Sandy Hook Elementary school as photographed by Gunsalus for the CT State Police report. Room 12 was Kaitlin Roig’s classroom. Left: Interior door handle; Middle: Exterior door handle; Right: Interior closet handle. Why does the closet door lock from the inside while the room door handle doesn’t?
A theme of confusion and illusion. The official/media portrayal of other doors at the school and other buildings involved in the incident deserves a review, too. Through their keyhole, one can spy a theme of confusion and illusion; whether the outcome is purposeful obfuscation or mere carelessness is a matter of opinion.
What was shown? What was hidden? Why a particular door, as opposed to another? Asking those questions so late in the game may actually be well-timed, since all of the mainstream media (MSM) reports are now in.
The doors tell a similar story. So let’s begin at the entrance to the Sandy Hook School, the one described in an excerpt from a police report provided via a FOIA request by Wolfgang Halbig:
That’s the one I mean.
A gaping hole. Nearly everyone has seen the famous Connecticut State Police photo of the Sandy Hook Elementary window near the entrance doors of the school. Nearly everyone knows it was shot out, allegedly by Adam Lanza, to allow entrance either by ducking forward or bending over backward, being careful not to catch one’s crotch on the shards.
The window in the photo is a fright, but the furnishings appear nice and intact, perfectly aligned and tidy. Even the magazines on the table are squarely stacked.
We’re expected to believe that the six-foot+ Lanza (and, later, a limbo line of police) entered this peaceful sanctum through the hole, crunching forward on glass fragments, without leaving the chaotic signs that violence usually marks its territory with. No boot prints. No stained upholstery, no upside-down furniture, no destruction of anything fragile, such as a flimsy magazine rack that Lanza, it’s presumed, painstakingly slid out of the way and arranged at a nearly perfect 90-degree angle to the window.
According to sworn affidavits in the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Reports (CT Dept. of Emergency Services and Public Protection), a long line of policemen entered through the window hole.1 If that’s true, as Wolfgang Halbig has asked, why didn’t one of them think to unlock the main door for his chums?
Improbable as this scene seems to Halbig (and likely everyone reading this), certain Sandy Hook believers have insisted on its authenticity over the years. From the cleverly named “Crisis Actors Guild,” for instance, a voluminous wag, “Shill Murray,” claims that the magazine rack sustained a bullet hole. S/He even provides the images below:
CB: Do you see a bullet hole in the magazines depicted in the photos above? I don’t.
What I do see is a flimsy prop, possibly set in place as a “time capsule” to substantiate the official report that SHES was open in December 2012. All of the magazines but one were 2012 editions, as Shill Murray demonstrates in the first of his/her 15-part series, “Sandy Hook Elementary Was Open.”
Shill is so punctilious in his/her examination of those neatly arrayed magazines that you can’t help but marvel. Such timeliness and orderliness are in stark contrast with the dated-looking, chaotic piles we see in other areas of the school.
So it seems justifiable to place the magazine rack on the already long list of Sandy Hook anomalies.
A shattered door window.A 2017 yahoo.com article provides a very different picture of a SHES door, creating more mental clutter and confusion. Below is the photo and caption from the article:
Note that the caption refers to “a door,” not the front entrance door “of the Sandy Hook Elementary School” damaged in the “shooting rampage.” You might understandably conclude that this door was one of Adam Lanza’s targets.
These brown doors are nothing like the metallic silver doors in the entrance photo shown previously. Yet the Yahoo article treats them as if they were the same doors, with a paragraph directly below the photo referring to “the front doors of Sandy Hook.”
Maybe the confusion created by Yahoo is unintentional; maybe not. But why not show the doors and window being discussed? Surely a hole with the circumference of a tire would get more reader views than a window that simply looks vandalized.
The same brown doors depicted above can be found in several other Sandy Hook Elementary photos from the Connecticut State Police report, identified by IMGUR as having been broken out by police officers.
When were they taken? There are no dates, so we can’t be sure. Nothing specific is provided about these doors in the State’s Attorney report except for this (page 21): “The conditions of windows and doors were documented, but some may have been disturbed by police and emergency personnel during the emergency response and protective sweep of the building.”
But what if the photos were taken before 12-14-12. If so, why? For a commissioned architectural study prior to demolition of the ratty-looking school? It’s anyone’s guess, but if so, vandals could easily have been the door-smashers, given the frangible nature of the glass.
It’s also possible that the vandalism occurred on 12-14-12. According to this article, based on the Connecticut State Police report (which took five years to complete), certain “dignitaries” trampled evidence at the crime scene and “heavily armed officers not clearly identifiable as police” were hanging about. What happens to the thin blue line in such circumstances?
Interesting, once again, that these doors – ostensibly shot out by police – were featured instead of the front entrance photo with the blown-out window. Why? Perhaps it was because of that dang magazine rack.
Whoever broke through the brown door must have had one heck of a time getting his/her hand through the gap over that nasty-looking shard to reach the inside push bar. Not an easy maneuver.
Circling the doors. Sandy Hook doubters are already familiar with the circle dance performed around the Sandy Hook firehouse that was captured on videotape by a police helicopter. Around and around people went, out one door, in another and out the door again, creating the illusion that there were mobs of people and mass confusion. This deserves much more discussion and readers can still find some of it on YouTube, notably, Sofia Smallstorm’s “Unraveling Sandy Hook.”
Hidden doors. There are more doors of interest at Chalk Hill Middle School (375 Fan Hill Road in Monroe, CT), which was Sandy Hook Elementary’s twin, made into an “exact replica” according to one ABC report. (You may well ask why, given the horrors that allegedly occurred in the school, anyone would want children in a replica environment.)
Unlike Sandy Hook, however, Chalk Hill has done a splendid job of hiding its doors in all of the online photos from U.S. news sources that we were able to find. A large metallic overhang makes it next to impossible to view the entrance where SH children were escorted inside before and after 12-14-12.
Photo Credit: Bill Bittar, Patch.com, Nov. 18, 2010
Below is the same school as a Sandy Hook “replica.” Confusing, but at least this is honest. Chalk Hill’s use as a Sandy Hook replica before 12-14-12 was cleverly concealed from the public.
Photo Credit: Bill Bittar, Patch.com, Jan. 3, 2013
It isn’t clear from the above photos whether or not Chalk Hill has any front entrance doors at all. However, here is a photo that proves the existence of Chalk Hill’s back entrance doors, compliments of Google Maps.
ABOVE: Chalk Hill Middle School; Photo Credit: Google Maps
Insights from Israel. While U.S. media largely failed to capture pictures of the Chalk Hill school’s exits and entrances, Israel succeeded in the window category. Always at the ready to record disasters waiting to happen, the Israeli press (Times of Israel) came up with this beauty (below), crediting AP. Peaked and window-heavy, it bears no resemblance to the shuttered-looking, flat-topped Chalk Hill Middle on Fan Hill Road in Monroe.
The caption reads: “Chalk Hill School in Monroe, Conn., where Sandy Hook Elementary School students from neighboring Newtown began classes on Thursday (photo credit: AP/Jessica Hill).”
It turns out to be Jockey Hollow Middle School in Monroe, photographed by Jessica Hill on Jan. 3, 2013. Ms. Hill either photographed the wrong school despite the likely presence of signs outside – or the sign outside read “Chalk Hill Middle School.” If the former is true, chalk it up to human error. If the latter, you must wonder: Why all of this identity confusion?
Were children in the Sandy Hook and Monroe school systems regularly being shuffled around from one town to the other, swapping classrooms and buildings like germs? Silly notion, but consider the very real evidence that Chalk Hill Middle’s address (375 Fan Hill Road, Monroe) appeared on invoices for Sandy Hook Elementary long before 12-14-12.
Shape-shifting. Sandy Hook Elementary’s identity crisis began long before it became mixed up with Chalk Hill. In a 2003 Newtown Community Facilities document no longer available online, it was once mistaken for Hawley Elementary School.
Big honking typo? Could be – if the Newtown Ministry of Proofreading was on holiday when the document was released.
Or is this part of the same bizarre theme noted above, in which Sandy Hook Elementary was whatever certain people said it was? A school whose doors, windows and magazine racks obeyed certain laws of physics, yet not others; a school on the move, as it were, jumping around from one address to the next, while effortlessly migrating its phone number; a school that could be counted on as a storehouse and a prop for a horror show.
Speaking of props, what about the safety system camera that was supposedly at the front entrance? More about that in Part 2.
“A group of State Troopers then started to walk into the school from the front door. I believe they walked in through the broken front window. They each had their guns drawn and were asking what was going on.”
“I entered the school through the broken glass window on the right side of the main doors.”
“TFC Blumenthal and I entered the building through the hole in the glass window.”
“I do not remember how I entered the school, but it may have been through the window.”
“I entered the main entrance of the school either through the front door or the broken window.”
“I am not sure if I checked the doors to see if they were locked but I eventually entered the school through the broken glass windows.”
“We all entered the building through the broken window and entered into the lobby of the school.”
“We entered the main entrance through either the front door or broken window.”
“Utilizing the blown out window, we joined other officers and entered/secured the lobby area.”
“We all entered the building through the broken window and entered into the lobby of the school.”
But on Tuesday, September 11, 2018, Lyddy was charged with first-degree larceny for stealing $500,000 from his former employer, Match Marketing Group (Norwalk). The charges followed a month-long investigation.
A Hartford Courant article outlines the sticky-fingered activities that Lyddy is accused of, including a 124-night stay worth $10,000 at the Danbury Holiday Inn on the Match Marketing Group’s credit card. By his admission, Lyddy used a free digital wallet app to charge $60,000 worth of fraudulent purchases. The warrant also listed multiple vacation expenses, including a $7,000 AirBnb stay and, oddly, another $7,000 for the Lyddy family’s annual charity event, Light Up the Point.
Adweek.com reports that Match Marketing Group was acquired by Southfield Capital from Beringer Capital in July 2018. According to the Courant, Lyddy had worked for Match since January 2016, resigning in January 2018 after being questioned about fraudulent expenses.
Not fake. Mainstream news sources for this unfortunate incident range from local to national.
The widespread unanimity usually points to fake news, but not, I think, in this case.
Scrambling to save face. Statements from gubernatorial candidates Frank and Griebel, as well as Newtown, have been deflective and terse.
From Newtown’s First Selectman, Dan Rosenthal: “At no time did Kyle have access to town funds and there are no complaints from donors alleging malfeasance. Should a complaint arise we stand ready to investigate promptly and fully.”
Newtown resident and lieutenant governorship candidate Monte Frank tweeted: “I am devastated about the news concerning Kyle Lyddy. I’m as shocked as everyone else who knows him. The campaign immediately transitioned his responsibilities to Chris Cooper & Chris DuPont & we are confident that they will guide us forward & sustain our momentum for the people.”
A noted gun-control activist, Frank is also the founder of Team 26, a cycling group that lobbies for gun control.
A narrow escape. At one point during Wolfgang Halbig’s determined yet stonewalled FOIA requests (March 2015), Frank canceled a commission hearing on the illegally withheld documents in order to participate in a Team 26 bicycle race.
Other criminals? The Sandy Hook 12-14-12 incident already has in its orbit at least one ex-con: Kevin Riley, whose former business, Hartford Trade Service, LLC, was engaged by the State of Connecticut to cremate the alleged remains of accused perpetrator, Adam Lanza.
With this latest development, it appears that more scrutiny may be called for. Avarice is one thing. Embezzlement is another.
A friend sent me a story last week about a Bridgeport, CT woman in her thirties who recently lit up a quarter-stick of dynamite. Allegedly, she was rummaging in her basement for alternative lighting during a power outage and mistook the explosive for a candle.
The ensuing explosion blew off several of the poor woman’s fingers. Tragic.
Tempting though it is to compare the poor soul to Wily Coyote or some other intellectually compromised character, it’s pretty evident that many people aren’t proactive about stocking emergency provisions, much less labeling them.
Imagine living out your life without fingers because the lights went out and you were in a blind panic.
Sparking tragic memories. The story reminded me of another victim of an explosion, although this one was the farthest thing, intellectually at least, from Wily Coyote.
From the linked article above: “Collins said investigators are unsure what sparked the explosion, but believe it was accidental. He said someone passing by saw the smoke, then Stomski lying in the drive way.”
Working with gasoline in closed quarters is dangerous because vapors can build up instead of dissipating, increasing the chance of an explosion if an ignition source is nearby.
And there’s another factor: If a gas leak occurs, vapors that spread beyond the spill can be ignited from a distance (even from hundreds of feet away) and “flash back” to their source. In this case, a lawn mower or gasoline can. Result: Big explosion.
Without a spark or flame, of course, gasoline won’t burn or explode unless the temperature is around 533 K( 499.73 F). (This is known as “auto-ignition temperature.”) Unless Stomski was working inside an oven, obviously that degree of heat isn’t what caused the explosion.
Emergency Director Tom Collins wouldn’t even wager a guess as to what ignited the flames. But, whatever it was, working in closed quarters didn’t improve Stomski’s chances.
Surely Stomski knew better. He was by no means challenged intellectually. He held a degree in plant and soil science from UMass; ran a successful landscaping business in Woodbury, CT; served as the town’s “Tree Warden”; and eventually became its First Selectman. The obituaryportrays Stomski as a kindly Johnny Appleseed figure, jovially pruning, watering and inspiring children to plant trees.
More relevant to this article, we are given only hints in Stomski’s obituary of his interesting avocations: as an “inventor” and a “security expert.”
Records show that between the years 2001 and 2004, Stomski applied for at least four U.S. patents See:
Transportable security portal for screening potential terrorits [sic]:
It’s obvious from the invention descriptions that Stomski was preoccupied with airport security technology, sparked at least in part by the September 11th “terrorist hijackings.” And this is borne out by the fact that he owned an LLC known as Advanced Automated Security Systems, last registered on Sept. 9, 2003. The location of the LLC had the same addressas Stomski’s GS Plant Landscape Enterprises.
A security expert who once spoke his mind. In a Hartford Courant article dated January 17, 2013 – about one month after the Sandy Hook incident – Stomski’s friendship with fellow Woodbury resident, Dawn Hochsprung, emerges as another factor in his biography, and perhaps his untimely demise. (Hochsprung was the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary during the time of the 12-14-12 incident, allegedly one of the victims.)
From the article: “He [Stomski] said he believes that airport security technology can be applied to schools.”
There follows a discussion of Stomski’s plans as a school security activist: “He is now hoping to play a role in legislative efforts to improve school safety. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has formed a committee to make recommendations and legislators are expecting multiple bills to be proposed.
“Stomski said he hopes to address legislators if hearings are held and that he is determined to carry on Hochsprung’s motto of “not on my watch.”
“”I hope we are not going to knee jerk our reaction,” Stomski said. “There is not one thing that will solve this issue.”
“Stomski said part of the problem is that schools mostly rely on administrators, teachers or other support personnel to develop plans for their schools when they should be relying on security professionals.
“”The details of security have to go to people in the field. Each school in each town is uniquely different in its security needs. There are different access points, different designs particularly with older schools,” Stomski said.”
The article goes on to describe some of Stomski’s ideas about security measures, such as real-time video streaming “to police headquarters from school parking lots” and beefing up school vestibules with bullet-proof glass.
An undated letter from Stomski to the Connecticut School Safety Committeereveals even more about Stomski’s work with various departments of the U.S. Government (among them, Homeland Security) as well as his association with the hapless Hochsprung. The letter describes how Stomski met with her in 2009 while she was still acting principal of Mitchell Elementary School (Woodbury):
“I worked with Dawn Hochsprung on writing a successful grant and assisted her with the proper application of these security controls for her school. Additionally, Dawn Hochsprung and I formed a relationship whereas we discussed on numerous occasions, what would need to be done should a shooter breach the school security, forcibly entering the school, and open firing once entered.”
The letter goes on to laud Hochsprung for her actions on 12-14-12 while blaming “the lack of necessary safety precautions and access control measures at that [Sandy Hook Elementary] school …”
Stomski ends the letter with a recommendation that each Connecticut school be profiled individually for particulars like “camera imaging.” One has to wonder what the School Safety Committee thought about Stomski’s full-blown commitment. If set loose, would he drill down into regions beyond Woodbury, profiling the driveways, halls, brick walls, windows and cameras of Newtown and even, say, Monroe’s Chalk Hill Middle School?
In any case, less than one month after the Hartford Courant interview, Stomski was in trouble,facing sexual harassment charges after a town resident complained, claiming that she had been offended by Stomski calling her “attractive.” The complaint by Linda Zukauskas was filed with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities.
The offending word was actually spoken the year before (!), at a May 2012 town meeting. So the timing of the harassment charge is worthy of note. One Litchfield County Times article framed it as “gender bias,” with the incident described from Zukauskas’s perspective: “ “Harassment is a very subjective thing,” she [Zukauskas] said. “It wasn’t sexual in a ‘Hey baby c’mon’ kind of way, it was sexual in a way that I’m a woman,” she argues.”
Talk about volatile and vindictive. Even the Boston Globe filed a story on it, perhaps only as click bait.
From the Boston Globe article: “Stomski said he uses the word attractive all the time and did not mean it in a sexual way.”
That same year (2013), Stomski would defeat his Republican challenger to become his party’s nominee for First Selectman in November. But he would ultimately lose his First Selectman positionand, in 2014, left Woodbury for greener pastures in Hampstead, NC.
A year later, Stomski had a critical safety issue of his own – inside his very own garage – an explosive circumstance that sounds, on its surface, improbable.
Out of character. Think about it: Why would someone as knowledgeable as Stomski box himself in with one of the most flammable substances known to garage owners? And what was the ignition source? Playing with matches seems out of the question.
Stomski’s tragic end may (or may not) be linked with what he knew about the Sandy Hook event.
Such a connection would certainly be more credible than, say, a story about a woman mistaking a stick of dynamite for a candle. Especially in light of this list of people* who, like Stomski, had their own brush with 12-14-12 before falling prey to untimely misfortunes and tragedies.
The above list is likely not complete, but, hopefully, it will ignite something more illuminating than the explosion that took Jerry Stomski’s life: preferably, critical thinking.
Levi jeans are often associated with gun-toting cowboys in the minds of consumers.
Now, Levi jeans have gone full-blown anti-gun.
In November 2016, the CEO of Levi Strauss & Co., the corporate owner of Levi jeans, virtue-signaled in an open letter on LinkedIn, asking that gun owners not bring firearms into Levi stores, offices, or facilities, even in states where it’s permitted by law.
Now, in a Sept. 4, 2018 op/ed in Fortune, CEO Charles “Chip” Bergh declares himself a believer in all the false-flag shootings from Sandy Hook to Parkland, and the company Levi Strauss a supporter for “gun violence prevention”.
Bergh begins by saying that he and his company were attacked after his 2016 open letter, “But these personal attacks pale in comparison to the threats that activists and survivors from Parkland, Sandy Hook, and daily incidents of gun violence face every time they speak up on this issue.”
Then Bergh describes why Levi Strauss is “stepping up” its support for “gun violence prevention”:
As president and CEO of a values-driven company that’s known the world over as a pioneer of the American West and one of the great symbols of American freedom, I take the responsibility of speaking up on the important issues of our day very seriously. We can’t take on every issue. But as business leaders with power in the public and political arenas, we simply cannot stand by silently when it comes to the issues that threaten the very fabric of the communities where we live and work. While taking a stand can be unpopular with some, doing nothing is no longer an option.
That’s why Levi Strauss & Co. is stepping up our support for gun violence prevention. You may wonder why a company that doesn’t manufacture or sell guns is wading into this issue, but for us, it’s simple. Americans shouldn’t have to live in fear of gun violence….
I know that Americans, including many of our own consumers, employees, and other partners, hold a wide spectrum of views related to guns. I’m not here to suggest we repeal the Second Amendment or to suggest that gun owners aren’t responsible. In fact, as a former U.S. Army officer, I took a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. But as retired four-star general Michael Hayden once said, “There are some weapons out there that frankly nobody should have access to. And actually, there are some people out there who should never have access to any weapons.”
Levi Strauss is supporting “gun violence prevention” in three ways:
By establishing the Safer Tomorrow Fund, “which will direct more than $1 million in philanthropic grants from Levi Strauss & Co. over the next four years to fuel the work of nonprofits and youth activists [like Parkland’s David Hogg] who are working to end gun violence in America.”
By “partnering with Everytown for Gun Safety and executives including Michael Bloomberg to form Everytown Business Leaders for Gun Safety, a coalition of business leaders who believe, as we do, that business has a critical role to play in and a moral obligation to do something about the gun violence epidemic in this country.”
By doubling Levi Strauss’ “usual employee donation match to organizations aligned with our Safer Tomorrow Fund.”
Note:Everytown for Gun Safety, founded in 2014 and financed by Michael Bloomberg “to match the National Rifle Association in political influence,” is a non-profit that advocates for gun control.
On August 27, 2018, Memory Hole Blog alerts us to the shocking discovery that Alt-Media giant, Alex Jones of Infowars, may be an aficionado of hardcore “transgender” pornography and, as such, may be compromised because of blackmail.
The discovery comes in the form of a video outtake from a recent Jones broadcast in which he was promoting “personal wellness” products when he clicked away from the products page on his smart phone. For a split second the camera, still trained on his smart phone’s screen, showed an array of open tabs including a still image of a hardcore transvestite porn video, “Naughty T-Babe Melissa Minx and Moka Mora Hot Sex”.
“Tbabe” is a term used to refer to “transgender” porn actors such as Marissa Minx, a so-called MtF (male to female) “transgender” who is really a biological male with breast implants. On his web site, Minx describes himself as a “sexy Australian tgirl” with an average-size penis.
The thumb-nail image on Jones’ smart phone is a crop of this larger image from the tranny porn video, labeled “Big titted T-girl Marissa Minx f*cks a guy”.
Below is a YouTube video on the revelation:
Reporting for the UK Independent yesterday, Aug. 28, Tom Batchelor claims that Alex Jones “made no comment about the page at the time of the video and has yet to respond publicly”. Batchelor crows:
Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, whose transphobic rants have seen his broadcasts removed from YouTube, unwittingly revealed transgender pornography on his phone….
He has a long history of using his broadcasts to attack the LGBT+ community, suggesting on one occasion that homosexuality was not “normal biological behaviour”….
Addressing drag performers in July, Mr Jones told them: “We’re going to destroy you. You will ascend to Hell in the reverse order. You need to fear god. Your god has stolen your soul.”
More than hypocrisy, if Alex Jones indeed is a tranny pornster, his disgusting fetish may be used to blackmail him. Certainly, there are persistent rumors that he and Infowars are “controlled opposition“. As Dr. James Tracy points out:
Can someone so Janus faced and with such apparent prurient interests be entrusted to carry forth the banner defending free speech? To what degree is Jones blackmailed via such obsessions? Is this perhaps one of the reasons why Jones can’t seem to get the story straight on so many false flag incidents?