Summary
âž¡ The text discusses the four stages of scientific reasoning and applies them to a murder case. It also introduces Lela’s quantum technology, which has been proven to improve health and neutralize harmful effects of electromagnetic fields. The text then delves into a controversial conversation about the Sandy Hook incident, questioning the official narrative and suggesting a cover-up. It ends by criticizing the justice system and inviting anyone with evidence to come forward.
âž¡ A free docu-series discussing fifth generation warfare and mind control is being aired from June 29 to July 9. The series, which can be purchased for additional content, is hosted by Brighton University and features Professor James Fetzer. Fetzer, a Princeton graduate and former Marine, discusses controversial topics such as the Sandy Hook incident, which he believes was a staged event to instill fear in the public. He emphasizes the importance of truth in history and criticizes the government for deceiving the American people.
âž¡ The text discusses a free docu-series on fifth generation warfare and mind control, starting on June 29 and ending on July 9. The series, hosted by Brighton University, features a conversation with Professor James Fetzer, who discusses his belief that the American government has deceived its citizens through staged events. Fetzer, a Princeton graduate and former Marine, also shares his academic journey and his views on the importance of truth in history. The text ends with Fetzer’s controversial views on the Sandy Hook event, suggesting it was a staged event to instill fear in the public.
âž¡ The text discusses the author’s journey through academia, highlighting their struggles and achievements. They discuss the impact of inflation and the importance of financial security, recommending a company called Miles Franklin for protecting savings with gold and silver. The author also shares their transition into computer science and the controversy they stirred with their paper on program verification. They conclude by discussing their research on JFK’s assassination and their pioneering work in collaborative research on conspiracy theories.âž¡ The text discusses the author’s journey through academia, highlighting their experiences at various universities and their shift into computer science. They discuss the impact of inflation and the importance of financial security, recommending a company called Miles Franklin for investing in gold and silver. The author also shares their research on program verification in computer science, which sparked controversy but ultimately earned them recognition and a prestigious title at the University of Minnesota. They conclude by discussing their shift into researching conspiracy theories, particularly the JFK assassination.
âž¡ The author discusses his extensive research into various controversial topics, including the JFK assassination, the Sandy Hook shooting, and the moon landing. He believes that his work, which often challenges mainstream narratives, has led to his books being banned and his reputation smeared. Despite this, he continues his investigations, driven by a desire to expose what he sees as government frauds. He also encourages others to question and investigate, arguing that conspiracy theories are a crucial part of understanding the world.
âž¡ The author discusses his extensive research into various controversial topics, including the JFK assassination, the Sandy Hook shooting, and the moon landing. He believes that his work, which often challenges mainstream narratives, has led to his books being banned and his reputation smeared. Despite this, he continues his investigations, driven by a desire to expose what he sees as government frauds. He also encourages others to question and investigate widely accepted theories.
âž¡ The text discusses a controversy involving Alex Jones, who is being sued and potentially taken down due to his controversial views and statements. The author suggests that Jones could defend himself by raising legitimate questions about certain issues, but chooses not to, leading the author to believe Jones might be part of the problem. The text also delves into scientific reasoning, explaining how evidence and hypotheses work together to form conclusions, but these conclusions can always be challenged by new evidence. Lastly, the author mentions a conspiracy theory about a school being closed and parents using their own childhood photos to represent their deceased children, but these claims are not substantiated in the text.
âž¡ The text discusses a controversy involving Alex Jones, who is being sued and potentially taken down due to his controversial views and interviews. The author suggests that Jones could defend himself by raising legitimate questions about certain issues, but chooses not to, leading the author to believe Jones might be part of the controversy. The text also discusses the scientific process of reasoning and how it applies to these controversies, as well as the possibility of false information and actors being used in certain situations.
âž¡ The text discusses a conspiracy theory about the JFK assassination, suggesting there was a second shooter and that the Zapruder film, a key piece of evidence, was edited. It also mentions disagreements within the conspiracy theory community and the author’s dedication to uncovering what they believe is the truth. The author also suggests that Princess Kate was murdered in a satanic ritual, and that the public is being misled about her death.
âž¡ The text discusses the JFK assassination, suggesting there was a second shooter and that the Zapruder film, a key piece of evidence, was edited. It also mentions a limousine stop that isn’t shown in the film, and various people who claim to have seen a different, less edited version of the film. The text also touches on conspiracy theories about Princess Kate’s death and the author’s radio shows dedicated to discussing such theories.
âž¡ The author discusses a controversial book that was banned by Amazon shortly after its release. The book, which sold nearly 500 copies before being banned, was later released for free as a PDF and has been downloaded millions of times. The book questions the authenticity of certain events and individuals, leading to a lawsuit. The author defends the claims made in the book and discusses the legal proceedings that followed.
âž¡ The author discusses a controversial book that was banned by Amazon shortly after its release. The book, which was later released for free as a PDF, has been downloaded millions of times. The author was sued for claiming in the book that a certain death certificate was fake. The author also discusses various conspiracy theories related to the Sandy Hook incident, suggesting it was a government-perpetrated fraud, and that the community was paid to participate in the scam.
âž¡ The speaker discusses their investigative journey into a controversial case, involving multiple sources and complex relationships. They express frustration over perceived cover-ups and misinformation, and call for serious examination of the evidence they’ve gathered. They also mention their work in radio shows and online platforms, and express appreciation for the host’s interest in their investigation.
Transcript
Obviously not zero higher than the others. So you send it off for an autopsy because you got to adjust your findings. If you get new evidence, turns out he was poisoned. Right. Well, then that’s perfect example. So you go through puzzlement, speculation. Alex Jones is very good at that. He talks about all kinds of issues that Americans ought to be concerned about. He speculates about it. He doesn’t follow through. He’s totally absent. The crucial scientific aspect is called abductive reasoning. Experience the groundbreaking advancements of Lela’s quantum technology. Now backed by over 40 placebo controlled studies conducted by elite institutions and renowned universities worldwide, this revolutionary technology surpasses previous achievements, as confirmed by prestigious organizations such as the Emoto Institute in Japan.
Scientific investigations reveal that Lela’s technology not only enhances blood health and circulation, but also neutralizes the adverse effects of electromagnetic fields, expedites wound healing, and elevates ATP production on human cells. Embrace the extraordinary benefits of Leela’s tech as recognized and utilized by world class athletes, esteemed functional medicine practitioners, and leading figures in the field of biohacking. Explore a range of transformative products, from the heal capsule, shielding you from harmful emfs, to the quantum block, allowing you to infuse frequencies into your cherished possessions. Dive into the realm of innovation and wellness@sarahwestall.com. shop or by following the link below.
Welcome to business game changers. I’m Sarah Westall. This is a very controversial conversation we’re going to have. We’re going to be talking to James Fetzer. Doctor. Professor James Fetzer. He is being blamed for a lot of things. He’s the guy that they, you know, is being blamed for taking down Alex Jones and the information behind Sandy Hook. But I gotta tell you, the information that’s out there on Sandy Hook is incredible. I don’t know what the truth is, but I sure want to know. And those of us who remember, pretty much all adults remember how traumatic it was for all Americans when this thing went down and these kids were supposedly were killed and how horrifying it is.
But some of the evidence that Fetzer claims to have is that. Let me just tell you some of this. The school was closed down for years before this event happened. There was no school there. The town got, the people involved, got millions of dollars and all had to sign non disclosures. I mean, this is the information he has. The FBI has zero records of death in Newton, Newton in Newtown, Connecticut, where that school is even to this day. Now, they could change it, but according to the records, as of now, they still have zero deaths during that period.
There is a FEMA manual that shows exactly the exercise at that place describing the Sandy hook shooting. They even have this FEMA schedule showing when it was on, when it was going to occur. I mean, this is just nonstop. They have pictures of some of the kids that would have died supposedly, and they were pictures of the parents as children. I don’t know if all that’s true, but oh my gosh, this information is so bad. The facts are so incredible that the american people have a right to know what is going on here. And if these cases that are, I mean, it looks like Alex Jones is being attacked to silence us, nobody will have a conversation.
Who has an audience, Sean and Sgt. Report who I love and a few others who have the courage to confront this will have these conversations. Most people are too afraid. YouTube won’t even put on. If you have Macchis, doctor Macchis, who’s the top cancer researcher or doctor, one of the top ones in the world, John Hopkins, the top cancer institute, uses protocol. You can’t even put him on YouTube. Otherwise they strike you and cancel you. People are afraid to talk about this if you can’t even talk about that. So we’re in this orwellian horrifying situation where we can’t address facts and ask questions.
Yeah, it is horrifying to tell parents that your child didn’t die and have people attack you. That would be traumatic. But it’s even more traumatic is if this whole event didn’t happen and you traumatized the american people and then lied and put people through all these court cases to get all the other journalists to shut up. If that’s true, that’s a bigger crime because they don’t care about people. They didn’t care about the fact that they were telling people that the COVID shot was safe and effective. If all these people are dying, getting myocarditis and all these other things they don’t care about people.
So they don’t care about the 20 or how many sets of parents that are feel traumatized. They don’t care about them if they don’t care about all the people that they lied to about COVID So we know that’s a false statement. Yeah. A normal, good person would care about them, and that’s what they’re tapping into to try to convince you that this is something that you are bad person. If you question this, you’re a bad person. You can’t question this. And that’s what they’re doing. This is a classical operation. I don’t know what’s true, but I got to tell you, the questions that I have.
I have a right, and so does every american in this country have a right to get answers to these questions and to tell me that I can’t talk about it, I can’t ask the questions is, I mean, we all know what right and wrong is. That is squarely in the wrong category. We should be able to ask these questions. So this is a very controversial interview, and I know it is, and I hope you listen to the whole thing. And as we start off, I get Fetzer’s background. I mean, he’s not just some bum I found on the street corner, you know, with the homeless sign.
He actually has a reputable, reputable background, and he’s going to talk about that and talk about a bunch of things. This is a long interview. And so what we did is we had the, we had a talk ahead of time, talked about the overall big picture, and then he gives a presentation about his court case. I put that on my substack. So if you are a follower of my substack, you can go to sarahwestall dot substack.com, and you can find it there. It’s Fetzer giving his presentation on his court case because they’re reopening it. They’re doing an appeal.
He’s giving all this evident evidence. He’s showing how the court, how they misbehaved. I mean, I don’t know what the proper legal terms in it, but it surely is an incompetence of the court, a travesty of justice, because they won’t even let him submit his evidence. I mean, what kind of real court system has one part, half, one party against the other, and one party can’t submit any kind of evidence? How can that be possibly be an unbiased, fair trial? Obviously, it’s not. And so we have serious issues in this country with our justice system. A lot of people think if we can fix our justice system, everything else will self correct.
But apparently, you know, our justice system is so broken that we can’t even get evidence submitted into trial. So you can even have a fair trial. I mean, this is just crazy. I don’t know. Again, I want to tell you flat out, I don’t know what the truth is here. I’m a journalist trying to find information. If you’re somebody else that has evidence showing that what Fetzer has is false, or you can give me and have a defense for it, I’m welcome to interview you, too. In fact, I would like to be able to put this evidence up against your evidence.
And we can show the american people, if you have evidence, that the school was actually open, not just somebody talking about it, but actual evidence, that’s the kind of stuff I want to see. He claims he has all these sources of people who were involved in the actual shooting, kids that have grown up, other people who he’s talking to. He has a whole collection of people who he’s working with. I mean, this is absurd. And it’s important enough of an issue that the american people deserve answers, and they deserve for our government to stop lying and to deal with these seriously.
Okay, before I get into this, I’m going to tell you, starting tomorrow, depending on when you watch this presentation, I have a docuseries airing on brightu.com, brighton University. But you can sign up@brightu.com. it’s on mind control and fifth generation warfare. It is how they’re playing these games to go after us. At fifth generation warfare, the difference between the past generations and now is before, it used to be a narrow agenda, political agenda, going at, wiping out or attacking the enemy’s forces to implement, to be able to implement your agenda today as they bypass the entire military and went directly to us.
That’s what we’re dealing with. So I hope you sign up. The whole docu series is free. It starts on June 29, which is tomorrow, depending on when you see this. It could be a week from now when you see this, but it’s still airing June 29 through July 9. And if you watch this after July 9, you can also purchase the digital series, which has five plus hours of additional material. I mean, there’s a lot of material in this, so you can get that as well. Brightonuniversity.com or sign up@brightu.com. brightu.com the link is below. Okay, let’s get into this really controversial and important conversation with Professor James Fetzer.
Hi, Jim. Welcome back to the program. Oh, Sarah, I’m delighted. I’m so glad you picked up on this issue. I’m so happy to have featured you and my false flags and conspiracies conference on an annual basis and look forward to having you back again this year. Well, I, you know, I really value that conference. I’ve been using that to develop my concept. I have a docuseries that’s out and it’s airing this Saturday and starting, it’s like a ten part thing with Brighton University. And it is a build off of what I did at the false fuzz conferences.
Well, I did a mini documentary which I played there as well, and that’s really helped me develop this, which is a lot of what you’re doing as well. The docu series is on mind control and fifth generation warfare, which is exactly what you are in the middle of. And I got to ask you, because now we’re going to be talking about Sandy Hook and some of these things. Why do you keep continuing to do this with everything? I cannot abide liars, phonies and cheats, Sarah. And I believe the american people are entitled to know the truth about their own history.
The government under Obama went into big time deceiving the american people. It was a political theater. But while these are staged events, they’re therefore faux terrorism. They have the same effects of terrorism. By instilling fear in a vast segment of the population, in this case, by staging an event and presenting it as though 20 children and six adults had died in a mass shooting, they instilled fear in every parent’s heart and mind across the nation. In fact, I believe some even committed suicide over the tragedy. Wow. How many people you think died over there? I remember how traumatic it was for me.
It really bothered me for days. I think only a handful. But the point is it traumatized the public, which, of course, was the whole idea. I mean, it was cleverly designed as a psyop to have maximal emotional impact. And when you’re hit emotionally, you tend to lose your rational faculties. So that even today, given the massive evidence I have, people tend to react very strongly negatively to any suggestion that it could have been fake because then they were fooled. And as it may have been Mark Twain who observed, it’s easier to fool man than to convince him he’s been fooled.
Well, and it was such a traumatic event. And, you know, I got it. Let’s talk a little bit about your background. As I said before we got on air, I said I didn’t just pick you up at the street corner as a homeless person, you actually have some serious credentials. I mean, you graduated with honors from Princeton, you have your PhD from Indiana. Can you talk? And it’s right in this area. Talk about you work, what, for a year at Columbia? Talk about your background a little bit. Sure. Sarah? Yeah. I went to public high school in south Pasadena and was selected for the Navy regular program, which meant they would provide your tuition, books and spending money if you’d agree to serve a minimum of four years as a regular officer in the Navy or the Marine Corps.
My dad wasn’t a wealthy man. He had five, six kids to support. He couldn’t have financed Princeton. In fact, it was ironic. They had a visiting admissions officer came to my high school and I was interviewed. I didn’t think anything about it. I came home in my. My mom said, and my stepmother actually said, jim, I think you ought to apply to Princeton because you’ve already been admitted. So I thought, well, why not? So I thought of Cal, Pomona, Stanford, Princeton. But since I was already admitted to Princeton, I just used Cal as a fallback. Now, I love Princeton.
It was all men. I was in the class of 62. And frankly, I believe that same sex colleges are far more efficient at developing intellectual capacity because you’re not being distracted by relations with the opposite sex. I mean, I’m telling you, sometimes you hear these absurd schemes about women on submarines. Wow, I can’t begin to tell you what a disaster. Nobody’s going to be thinking about launching their torpedoes. They’re going to be thinking about getting a little action with a female sailor. I mean, it’s just outrageous. The diversity equity business is so stupid at a very profound, deep level.
In any case, I love Princeton. I’d gone through the catalog and circled every course that interests me, and they had to do with concepts and theories. Most of them were grouped in the department of philosophy, so I wound up majoring in philosophy. Now, at the time, I did not know, but Princeton in that erade ranked number one in math, physics and philosophy. I wound up writing my undergraduate thesis for the most influential professional philosopher of science in the world at the time, Carl G. Hempal. My thesis won an academic prize at Dickinson, prize for the best essay in logic or theory of knowledge.
I graduated magna cum laude, was commissioned as a second lieutenant, US Marine Corps at graduation, served four years, 13 months in the Far east, and brought back to the recruit depot in San Diego, where I was a series commander with 15 DI’s and 300 recruits under my command going through the training cycle. And then the second year they moved me up to regimental headquarters to revise the curriculum. So instead of producing 8000 recruits in eleven weeks, we could produce 11,000 recruits in eight weeks using the same facility. And I was there to see it work at maximum efficiency, but had mixed feelings about it because I didn’t believe we belonged in Vietnam.
In any case, I resigned my commission as a captain to enter graduate school in the history and the philosophy of science at Indiana, where Hempbell’s leading critic, a fellow named Wesley Salmon, was on the faculty. So I was a Sammond student at my dissertation on explanation of probability. Spent my third year of the four at Columbia. Because you have an outside minor in a different discipline, and because I was in history and philosophy, I could do it in philosophy. At Columbia. We had a couple of the most famous philosophers as science in the world there too, and then finished my PhD in 1970 and began an academic career.
My first appointment was at the University of Kentucky, where I received the first distinguished teaching award from the student government. This was the first they’d ever award at Sarah to out of 135 assistant professors. Now that was to indicate the student believed this assistant professor was deserving of tenure. But since coming out of the Marine Corps, I’d stepped on a lot of my colleagues feet. I’d embarrassed the guy who used to run the program in logic. He’d always explained his poor course evaluation. It was so difficult when they gave it to me, and I’d had to work through my own understanding of logic to appreciate that it’s a simplified model of language, that it leaves out many elements of language.
So you got to look at it as a simplified model that captures some but not all. In other words, I knew what logic, formal logic was all about and my graduate student just absorbed it. We started turning out all these enthusiastic students of logic, so I embarrassed him. I was living with my girlfriend without benefit of marriage, and one of the other tenured faculty would, after I’d long left, when he was asked by another junior faculty that that was the reason he voted against me. I had more publications and better journals than any assistant professor they’d ever had, and I given a dozen talks at the invitation of eight different departments.
Sarah, I don’t think anyone has ever done that in the academy anywhere in the United States. But I was too controversial and they denied me tenure. I was immediately hired as a visiting associate professor by University of Virginia, which at the time was the number one public university in the country. And then I came back to Cincinnati. The second year I was at Cincinnati, I got a grant to write my first book on the theoretical foundations as scientific knowledge. I wound up then at North Carolina Chapel Hill, another outstanding university. Eventually new college at the University of South Florida, Sarasota.
I was back at Virginia again as a visiting full professor. I didn’t have ten years trying to put together a job. Here’s an example of what happened in 2023. According to MIT, living wage calculator folks in major cities needed around $68,499 just to make ends meet comfortably. But guess what happened next? In just one year, that number shot up a whopping 40% to 96,500. Can you believe how much inflation has affected us? That’s the kind of inflation that keeps us up and at night. Now, I don’t know about you, but I sure can’t afford to keep pace with that kind of skyrocketing cost of living.
It’s downright scary. But you know what’s even scarier? Not doing anything about it. That’s why I’ve been talking to folks over at Miles Franklin. They’re all about helping regular people like you and me protect our hard earned savings. With gold and silver. You can lock in the value of your money and shield yourself from the ups and downs of the economy. So if you are like me and want to keep your nest eggs safe and sound, reach out to miles franklin@infomilesfranklin.com. just mention my name, Sarah Sentney, and they’ll take care of you like family, because it’s just how we do things here in middle America.
Don’t wait until it’s too late. Protect your future. Today I was a candidate for position at Florida, and I know this story because I have a friend who was on the faculty there, and the head of the department was going through, you know, their candidates, and I was the number one. He says feathers got the best letters, he got the best publications, but he said Kentucky turned him down. There must be something wrong with him next. See, I mean, it was that kind of thing I was suffering from. And so, yeah, I. So a friend of mine, I had had an offer from Davidson College for another visiting one year, right? And this friend of mine called me up and said he was going to enter a program in computer science and artificial intelligence at Wright State in Dayton, Ohio, for PhDs in philosophy and linguistics.
He wanted to know if I would be interested. Well, I didn’t know anything about computers, but I knew I had to do something different. So I entered the program and get this. The year before I entered the program, I’d had seven interviews for positions at the Eastern American Philosophical association convention, which is the big job market, all junior. I entered the program. I had seven interviews, all senior, and I was hired as full professor with tenure on the Duluth campus, the University of Minnesota. I mean, it was a huge thing. And my very first paper in a programming language course was about a movement called program verification, which were a group of formalists who were obsessed with logic, who thought if you could verify.
They called it verification. It’s actually technically validation. If you could verify that a program went from input to output, given all the lines of the program, then you could guarantee what a computer would do when it executed the program. Well, I knew that was a category mistake. They were talking about an abstract model, the sequence of lines versus a complex causal system. I mean, Sarah, how many ways could your computer go wrong when it’s executed a program? Maybe you have a power outage, right? I mean, it’s interesting that they would do that. I mean, well, if nothing, if all variables are controlled, then, I mean, that’s my.
I have a degree in computer science. Right? So if all variables are controlled and you can run just through the algorithm, then it’s a for sure thing. But you can’t. You’re right. You can’t control all the variables. Well, exactly, because you’re talking about causal systems in the physical world versus a logical proof in abstract space. There. See, when I got into computer science, I mean, this is early on, let’s see, 19, 86, 87. There were all these philosophical problems computer science didn’t even know existed. They didn’t even know existed. Sure. So here you have this philosopher of science with all this training, and it was just a bonanza for me.
There are now books written that suggests I’m the father of the philosophy of computer science. But the program, get this. I got so lucky. So I wrote this paper, and the instructor wrote on it. Fascinating. I thought, well, geeze, if my instructor thought was fascinating, maybe the profession would like. And I submitted to the communications of the ACM, which was a leading professional journal for the community, and I got lucky because I got an editor who actually cared about the issues I was talking about. In fact, another editor, who is more informal system, said he would have rejected it outright.
He put me through revision three times. So it originally was a 20 page paper. Then I did first revision 27 and another seven pages 34th and another seven page 41. Each time elaborate and explaining to make accessible these philosophical concepts for the computer science community. Well, when it was published, it created an international controversy for a year. Communication of ECM, which is barraged with letters, complaints, blah, blah, blah. In fact, right off the bat, I was called by the editor saying they had these letters that were objecting. They were attacking the journal, saying it should never have been published.
And I said, well, please hold off until I can respond, because if you publish those without my response, it’s going to be a dead issue. They’re going to thought. And they actually delayed. They let me respond, and I just took them apart one by one by one. Sarah. I mean, you know, these were people who are very naive, philosophically, very sophisticated in terms of computer science. And I got to admit, although many, because of my expertise in logic, thought I’d be a wizard at programming, I never actually completed a single programming project. I was in the program.
The others all got their MS in computer science. There were five of us all together. The other four got their degrees, but you’ve never heard of them. The guy who didn’t get the degree, man, this has been my most popular paper worldwide, and I have a lot of papers out there. So, you know, it’s called program. It’s called program verification. The very idea. And listen to this. When I was at Duluth, at the University of Minnesota from 87, in 96, they introduced a new, higher rank than full professor. It was called distinguished McKnight university professors, and it came with $100,000 research grant.
And when my dossier was submitted, it concluded a letter from a world famous philosopher of computer scientists who said, the world sleeps more safely at night because of what Doctor Fetzer published. Wow. And so that’s why you got the highest honor. And now what you’re saying is how political the actual university systems are. That’s what you’ve just described. And why we have so many professors who have been put through the ringer to get their tenure, and they’re almost scared to get involved in any controversy. Yeah. Yeah. If you’re talking about my ten years in the wilderness and all that.
See, I only had three books before I was hired as full professor. I had to spend all this time and effort planned to 60 or 70 jobs just to stay afloat from year to year. So when I got a tenured position, I was unleashed. I published, I don’t know, 13 or 16 books in the first couple of years. And what this new rank was, to recognize full professors who had enhanced the international reputation of the University of Minnesota by the work they had done while at the University of Minnesota. And I was in the first ten who were promoted.
In fact, to the best of my knowledge, no one, not on the Twin Cities campus other than myself, has been elevated to a McKnight professor, or I’m today McKnight professor emeritus. And I kept my hand in. I wound up publishing 24 academic books, including on the foundations, the theoretical foundation, computer science, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, evolution of mentality. But then, beginning in 1992, I got drawn into serious research on the assassination of JFK. And by 1998, I published my first collection of expert essays entitled Assassination Science, which went through 14 printings. I mean, look, academic books usually sell 750 copies in their entire lifetime, and the royalties are picayune, very, very modest.
I get a check for $10,000 in royalties for assassination science. And then the university was very supportive. There was an associate dean in the graduate school in the twin campus who liked my work on JFK. And the university funded not one, but two different conferences. I organized one in 1999 on the death of JFK in Minneapolis, and another in 2003 on the Zapruder film, where I brought together the six experts, best experts in the world. Now, what I have done, Sarah, is to pioneer collaborative research on conspiracy theories and conspiracy research. Bringing together, it was obvious to me, because I’d edited all these books on computer science, philosophy of mind, and all that stuff.
So when I began doing serious research in these complex and controversial issues, it was obvious to me what I should do is bring in the best experts I could to contribute. And it turns out the more you have involved here in collaborative research, that the less the likelihood you’re going to make a mistake, basically double checking one another’s work and these books have been successful. The second was entitled Murder in Dealey Plaza, 2000. The third, the great Zuckerberg film Host, 2003. And I’m telling you, Sarah, they shattered the COVID up. And once you shatter the COVID up, once you discover the autopsy x rays have been altered to conceal a blowout at the back of the head, that another brain was substituted for the brain of JFK, that the secret Service had set him up for the hit, that the whole movies had been altered to conceal a true cause of death.
The range of alternative suspects becomes very limited because KGB, for example, couldn’t have extended its reach into Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter x rays under control of medical officers of the US Navy and the secret service, pro anti Castro Cubans, could have substituted another brain. The mafia could have got its hand on as a brutal film to edit it. I mean, I’m telling you, it’s a tiny group and it turns out Lyndon Johnson was a foundation. It began in Los Angeles in 1960 when he lost the democratic nomination at JFK. That’s a story for another day.
I’ll just tell you this. Research I’ve done, collaborative across the board, has been hugely successful. So I did. When Paul Wellstone plane went down just 60 miles north of my office in Duluth, I wound up investigating Wellstone. I published ten articles in a local alternative newspaper. I flew an expert up from Australia. A guy named John P. Costello had a PhD in electromagnetism and who really figured out how it was done by creating an electromagnetic field and then drawing the well stone plane in it so it would pop. All the computerized components, including navigation emergencies caused a plane to stall, put the props on below idle, so it was destined to crash.
We were trampling around in the snow there, picking up pieces of the charred Wellstone plane wreckage in 35 below zero weathers era. But, see, you were respected for this, and you brought in experts, and then you got involved in the Sandy hook thing. Okay. Yeah, that. That was a whole. This is a. Before I say that you weren’t. You’re not a conservative, either. You were always a Democrat. Right? So the Democrat Republican thing is just all B’s as well. Well, I. But, yeah, I voted twice for Bill Clinton. I wrote it twice for Barack Obama. In retrospect, I have serious concerns.
NAFTA was disastrous for manufacturing an industrial base promoted by Clinton. Obama actually nullified the Smith Mutt act, which precluded the use of the same techniques of propaganda within the United States that were used without by the Smith Modernization act of 2012, just in time to legalize the Sandy Hook hoax. So what he did was actually make it legal to perpetrate these frauds on the american people. So get this. Not only have I had research Sandy Hook and then had the book banned, I did Boston bombing, Orlando and Dallas, Charlottesville, Parkland, even the moon landing. Amazon has banned all six of those books, Sarah, and it’s not because we got things wrong.
Okay, so why, before we get into this, why, with all the political pressure, do you continue doing this? Because you were really at the pinnacle of your career, very highly respected. Now they are trying to smear anybody that does real investigative work in the Sandy Hook or some of these other topics as well. But Sandy Hook is probably the most toxic. Why do you. Why do you continue when you know that they’re just going to smear you? Well, I actually bought these on my blog. I said, how do you take down an extinguished McNutt? University professor.
I mean, I had all these credentials. They figured out a way, sir, which I’m going to explain, because I’m now unraveling the whole thing in the courts in Wisconsin. And as I’ve gone back to the origin, I carried my case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, to no avail, Sarah, because the way I’ve been treated in the course was so grotesquely abusive, as I shall explain. But, look, I’m a former Marine Corps officer, right? I’m dedicated to the best interests of my nation. And what I can do now to most promote that is to expose the frauds being perpetrated by the american government on the american people.
I don’t like that. And what I can best do is expose it. You know, use my intellectual background, ability, faculties to expose. I mean, I. I have become quite expert. And altogether now, I have 40 books. I mean, I have more than a dozen in what you call conspiracy research. I’ve been going out of my way to explain why we all should be considered to be conspiracy theorists, that they’re attacking us because we’re exposing evidence that leads back to the criminals who were responsible. So when they attack you as a conspiracy theorist, it’s part of the Cobh.
They don’t want themselves to be exposed. But, you know, I’m not buying it. I even put out a video called why I, Jim Fetzer, am a conspiracy theorist. And went through and laid out, you know, it was about 20 minutes, just laying out why, if you care about the truth. It turns out my very first published article about this was entitled thinking about conspiracy theories. JFK and 911. And I explained that conspiracies are as american as apple pie. Most american conspiracies are economic, but they happen every time. I use this, an illustration of then current issue of the New York Times.
And on every single page, there were stories you could not understand if you didn’t realize they were talking about a conspiracy. So what I did here was to show how you can apply the basic principles of scientific reasoning to sort out conspiracy theories, because they’re theories. So, you know, Hippel was a master at articulating the criterion for the evaluation of scientific theories. So I applied the principles to conspiracy theories. And would you believe I repeatedly tried to have journals like the Journal of Philosophy, which happens to be basic? Columbia published a piece called what’s wrong with conspiracy theories? Where I explain how you can treat them exactly the way you do with ordinary theories, and you can sort out what happened in the philosophy.
Journal of Philosophy has declined repeatedly to publish, even for my Princeton, my class, 62, getting up there. Most of my classmates, my dearest friends, are all part of this earth. They have a lecture series. So I submitted. I wanted to do what’s wrong with the conspiracy theory, to explain how that our distinguished professor of philosophy, Carl G. Hemp hall, right there at Princeton, had given the keys to unraveling. You know, where’s he think? But they won’t do it. They think that I’m discredited by Sandy Hawk. They got someone there who claims he knows somebody who knew somebody who died at Sandy.
And I tell them, well, yeah, who the hell is it? It all started out. Listen, Sarah, for over two years, I’ve been in contact with actual participants in the drill. With a. With a gal who was cast as Emily Parker, little blonde haired, blue eyed girl. You may recall there was a little blonde haired, blue eyed girl sitting on the lap of Barack Obama that was supposed to be one of her sisters. It’s actually one of her cousins. Robbie Parker came out and feigned, you know, having lost a daughter. It comes out all jocular. Sees a breast, pauses, hyperventilates, gets in character and start talking about the loss of his daughter, but having the presence of mind, to be sure, to mention her donation website, several of which, by the way, were put up before the event even took place.
He’s not even her father. He’s her uncle. But that guy was in a CNN clip showing against Alex Jones. CNN had him sitting there talking about the traumatic things the parents had to go through because of Alex Jones and Ronnie Parker. He was the one I want to. And just a simple question. Why were you jovial? And then once you thought, the cameras are going on, why did you go through an actor’s, you know, practice where you get into character and then became a different mode that you don’t do? Parents don’t act that way. Why did you act that way? These are the questions that people have the right to know, because there was so much trauma that was subjected on to the american people that we have a right to know, too.
It’s not just the trauma of the parents and the families. It’s the trauma of the entire american populace here that we are talking about. Yes vote terrorism. As I said, listen, it’s all fraudulent. These are synthetic families. Most of them are married. They have fake names. Some of the, some of the. Remember, Wayne Carver explained he didn’t allow the parents to come into contact with their kids. They identified him by photographs. Well, that was appropriate because most of them only exist in his photographs. Some of the parents even use photographs of themselves as children to be their deceased children at San Diego.
That’s how bad it is. See, that’s the problem. And these are the questions that the american people deserve and have a right to know, because we were all victims of this. Now I got to ask you, because they’re taking down Alex Jones, his network, because he. They sued him for, what, 1.5 trillion and then reduced it. I think it was up there. And then reduce it to. No, but it was 1.5 billion. Billion. I don’t know. But it was a lot like, who has that much money in this industry? And now it’s like a billion, and they’re trying to take him down because of probably having an interview with you.
I mean, you were a big part of why he’s being taken down. And so, Sarah, go ahead. I sought to support him. I offered to be a witness in the Remington case. I sought to be a witness in Alex Jones case in Connecticut. I sought to be a witness in Alex Jones case in Austin. And I was declined every single time. When. When Elon Musk brought Alex back to Twitter, they had a big, long conversation, and Alex said that he’d been misled by professors in Florida, Wisconsin. That would be James Tracy, who published a brilliant piece critiquing Wayne Carver’s press conference in me.
And a school safety expert, Wolfgang Helbig. Well, Tracy and Helmick were in my book, but get this. During a video deposition, Connecticut, he claimed he never even read. Nobody died at Sandy Hook. Well, if he never read the book, how can we have misled him? Sarah, how can we misled him? He never even read our stuff. He’s put himself in a preposterous position, indefensible. So why is he. Why are they attacking him, do you think? I mean, I have my opinion. Well, because he does do a lot of good work in getting out story. See, there are four stages of scientific reasoning.
Puzzlement. Something doesn’t add up. Speculation. What could possibly be going on? Adaptation. How do the alternative hypotheses, are they supported by the available evidence? It’s really a question. What’s a probability of the evidence if the hypothesis were true? Here’s a real simple example. You got a body, and it has some bruises around the neck, but it has no bullet holes, no knife wounds, blah, blah, blah. So what’s a probability they were killed by being shot? Well, absent a bullet hole, zero. Well, probability being stabbed, no. Stab wound. Probability zero. Probability strangulation marks around the work, obviously, not zero higher than the others.
So you send it off for an autopsy because you got to adjust your findings. If you get new evidence, turns out he was poisoned. Right. Well, then that’s perfect example. So you go through speculation. Alex Jones is very good at that. He talks about all kinds of issues that Americans ought to be concerned about. He speculates about it. He doesn’t follow through. He’s totally absent. The crucial scientific aspect is called abductive reasoning. What’s the probability of the evidence if the hypothesis were true? And then you get what are called likelihoods, and the hypothesis that confers the highest probability on the available evidence is the one that has the strongest degree of support.
And then when the evidence settles down and it all points in the same direction, you go to that fourth stage of explanation where you’re entitled to accept the best supported hypothesis as true, but in the tentative, infallible fashion. Assigned tentative. It’s always possible that new evidence may force you to reject hypotheses you already accepted, accept hypotheses you previously rejected, and leave others in suspense. Fallible. Even the best supported theory inside might turn out to be false. Newton’s theory of classical physics for 200 years was thought to be infallibly true. And then Einstein came around and showed it was a special case of a more general theory of relativity.
So even Newton, which was a very paradigm of, you know, scientific knowledge, turned out to be fallible. And when Einstein provided more encompassing theory, we found it was actually a special case, whereas we had assumed it applied to all region of spacetime, independent, for example, the speed of light at all events, where either is simultaneous with or earlier or later than. But that all turns out to be relative to frames of reference. In other words, science is an ongoing enterprise. Alex was just trying to exonerate himself. Elon Musk gave him all this rope. But I was.
I was emailing, I was posting on Twitter, you know, points like I’ve just made. I mean, how. How can we have misled him if he never read the book? And how stupid it would be to talk about this without reading the one authoritative book? Where I brought together 13 experts, Sarah, including six PhDs, and we established a school had been closed by 2008. There were no students or teachers there, and there’d be a FEMA drill. We even had the FEMA manual for the exercise, which I published as appendix a Yde. Well, Katherine Austin Fitz said they brought in the B team to run this thing.
She probably won’t talk about it publicly anymore, but that’s what she said on my program years ago. So who said? Who said that? Katherine Austin Fitz. They brought in the B team for Sandy Hook. Yeah. So bad. It’s so obvious to anybody that actually looks at it. She probably doesn’t want to talk about it publicly because everybody who does gets destroyed. Now, Alex Jones could bring up some of these topics, like, if you can prove that the kids, the pictures that are used are the parents when they were kids, that’s pretty damning, isn’t it? Well, I’ve already proven that Noah Posner, and it was a death certificate for him that I was sued over.
Noah Bosner was made up out of photographs of his alleged half brother, Michael Vander when he was a child. I’d proven it. We’ve done superimposition. You can see Noah turned into Michael Vandner. Michael Vander is alive and well doing comedy in Cambridge, Massachusetts. All this. All this was in my record. Sarah. What? I mean, these things are big deal. I mean, the fact that, I mean, some of the school being closed is a slam dunk. The parents using pictures of themselves when they were kids is like, what the heck? Some of these things are just so absurd.
Alex Jones could defend himself by just putting some of these things out there and saying, there’s some legitimate questions here that I think the american people need answers to. So. But he won’t do that, which makes me wonder. He knows these things exist and he doesn’t want to go there. He’s protecting himself for some reason. I’ve been forced. I’ve been forced to conclude he’s in on it. Now, let me tell you, he did very good early reporting exposing the sham. He had one guy talking to neighbors, and they said they were surprised there were any kids there because the school had been closed for a long time.
I began to explain how for over two years, I’ve been in contact with actual participants in the exercise. The woman who was cast is Emily Parker, along with Noah Posner. The two most photogenic. She, the most photogenic little girl. He the most photogenic little boy. And then there was a teacher, Victoria Soto, who purportedly gave her life to defend her kids at Sandy Hook. Well, Victoria Soto made a reprise at you bald. Hey. And I was actually talking on the phone with my contact, a guy who knows them both and probably knows more about Sandy Hook than any living soul on earth.
When Margaret, who was cast as Emily, was beside him talking to Vicki and asking her how much he was paid to reprise her role as Eva Morales in Uvalde, and she told her $210,000 gosh. So she even said how much she was paid. You know, I’ve had Oli Damegaard, our mutual friend on the show. He’s probably the world’s most foremost expert on these false flags. And he follows these actors, and they come in and they’re doing the same actors follow these programs around. And that’s what you’re confirming here? Yeah. Well, I would kick Nick Colorstrom and myself as sure with only the three leading experts.
The three leading experts on Volkswagen. Okay, but you guys. Well, I mean. I mean, look, go ahead. Ole and I had a falling out over James files because he bought files, and I like files. Files claims have been the second shooter on the grassy. No. Well, there were just two shooters, and Lee Oswald was in the doorway when the motorcade came by. There were actually, believe it or not, eight different shooters, and none of them was named James Files. So that I actually had dinner with files. He and his wife came up here to Madison. I took him to my favorite steakhouse, and we had a very interesting conversation.
I like the guy tremendously. Now, he’s a serious guy. He’s a real hit man. He just didn’t shoot Jack. I mean, when the House committee reinvestigated the case in 19, 77, 78, they published a final report in 79 where, based on acoustical evidence from a motorcycle guy who allegedly had his mic, they claimed there’d been a second shooter on the grassine hole. James Files was cast as that second shooter on the grassy knoll. But the fact is, he doesn’t explain the limousine stop. That setup is shot. You know, as we’ve done all this work on the Zapbrother, it’s been very tedious, taken us a long time.
So that I have a fourth book on JFK published in 2017. But Larry Rivera has a book called the JFK Horseman that you can also obtain at Moon Rock books. Retranscribe the Fred Newcomb interviews with the motorcycle patrol officers and their supervisor, Stavis Ellis, and they all confirm a limo stop on Elm street that you do not see in the Zapruder film. And during this limo stop, Bobby Hargis in the left rear. There were only four motorcycle escorts, which was ridiculous. Dismounts from his bike runs between the two limos would have been impossible had they been in motion up to the grassy knoll from which he believes shots have been fired.
Douglas Jackson on the right motor, is actually up on the grass. He rides his bike up on the grass till it falls over, then he proceeds on foot now, five agents got out and surrounded the presidential limbo. One of them took a little chunk of skull, a chunk of skull from a little boy, threw it in the backseat. And this is most astonishing. One of them actually climbed into the presidential limousine. His name, Glenn Bennett. This is not Clint Hill, who rushes up. And by the way, now we know how he could get on the limo.
It was stationary. Remember Jackie scrolling back up after a chunk of JFK skull and brain. She holds all the way in her hand to parkland. And then after they pry as moribund body out of her hand, she composes herself, walks into trauma room number one, turns to the anesthesiologist pepper Jenkins, extends her hand and asks, will this help? The most poignant moment in the assassination. She knew a lot about art, literature, music, theater. She didn’t know anything about ballistics, neurology, you know, wounds. I mean, very touching. But the fact is that secret service was deeply involved.
There are a couple of figures prominent in the JFK community by the name of Josiah Tink Thompson and Robert Groton, who insists to this day that brutal film is authentic. Oh, my goodness. We have taken it apart. It’s absolutely not authentic. There are more frames that were taken out that remain in the extant version. 486 are actually about a thousand frames altogether. They took out 100 turning from Houston on down because the driver, William Griff, swung out too widely, nearly hit a concrete, a bottom one, had to pause and then get back in line. That would have shaken.
Did you get. Did you get some of the original suborder film so that you knew that was taken out? How do you know that that. Well, I. I got six parties I could name who have seen what they call the other film. Wow. The Bruder himself. Some have seen it as many as three times, Sarah. And Zapruder himself said he began filming when it came into view, and he never stopped filming, meaning even by Zapruder’s own account, he had that continuous turn from Houston onto Helm. And then we have, as I say, the newcome tapes where the motorcycle officers themselves are reporting the limo stop.
But these six parties, I’m telling you, see the limo stop in what, what they call the other film. They don’t want to, you know, declare it to be the original Zapruder, but it’s obviously less edited and may very well be. In fact, the original Zapruder was developed in Dallas at Kodak. They appear to make four copies, the first of which was sold to HL Hutt for $100,000 to the best. I’ve been able to determine. Then one of them was taken in the National Photographic Interpretation center on Saturday, where they had the facilities that blow up images from satellites.
They created briefing boards. But then Sunday, another version was brought from Rochester, where the CIA had a secret lab called Hawkeye Works. David Lifton, in his book best evidence 1980, was the first to figure this out. And they brought the revised film. Now, look, physically, they were different. The film Saturday, see the camera, use a 16 millimeter film. You shoot down one half, take it out, flip it over, shoot down the other half. So if you want to play the whole thing, you’d have to split the film and then, you know, paste it together, spice it together.
Well, the film that came in Saturday, the real film, was an eight millimeter, all ray split film that had been developed in Dallas. The film that was brought in Sunday to make the substitution with the edited film was a 16 millimeter, unsplit film developed in Rochester. So, you know, you have no idea with what detail we know what happened. We’ve been able to identify. Yeah, I don’t know why people who are on the edge of these research actually, like you guys, had a falling out. I. You know, I’ve talked to many people on the edge of different things.
I don’t know. I’m just going to say I don’t know why people have a falling out, because. So what if you disagree on a couple details? You guys have it all together on the vast majority of it. Look, I’m a. I’m a huge fan of Ole Domagaard. In fact, Oli designed the COVID of my Moon rock books. Oli designed the COVID of my Moon rock books. Oh, yeah. You guys. I want you guys to end that final because I’m a huge fan of. Now, now, Nick is completely brilliant. He has a book also with Moon rock books, about conspiracy chronicles, about 13 false flags in the UK, including a yemenite multiple in the United.
In the United Kingdom. I highly recommend that Nick and I. I mean, holy. And I used to do shows a lot. Nick and I still do. Most recently on Princess Kate, who, I’m sorry to say, we believe was actually murdered in a satanic sacrifice in December. I mean, it’s all very bad stuff, really. Is that why? Because, I mean, I keep seeing clips. I haven’t followed that story. I don’t know. But I keep seeing clips that. Where they slow it down and show that they’re manufactured. Clips are not real. They’re able to. They’re trying to perpetrate the fraud that she’s still alive.
But she, Nick and I, so far as we can tell, she died in December. She was sacked. Have her die of cancer. I mean, they’re going to have to. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. That’s what they’re doing. They’re now saying she’s on the verge of death from cancer. I mean, they’re just striking it out of. It’s all pr. It’s all PR, Sarah. Yeah. Interesting. It’s just, you know, the longer you’re in this field, the more you realize that you just can’t believe anything that they say. And some of the things by accident is true, but you don’t know.
They don’t care. It doesn’t have to match reality. But the american people deserve this. Go ahead. Where guys like me come in. I’m doing 16 hours of radio, Monday, Wednesday, Friday from noon to 02:00 p.m. on Revolution radio, a show called the Raw Deal. Then five days a week, I took over from Michael Rovero on RBN and I do a show called Authentic News. Five days a week from three to five eastern. So that’s 16 hours of. About 22 hours a week I spend on the Internet with shows that are regular, but the others are pre recorded and then put out.
Those are all scheduled. Right. I’ve got a hard deadline and all that. That’s a lot of work. I know. That’s a lot of work. So because I’m doing is a ton of work and that’s just. Oh, my gosh. So did you ever think that you’d be doing this? I mean, that after all your whole career now? No, no, no. But I love it, Sarah. I love it. Well, because there’s a passion for it to get the truth out for the american. Yeah, I feel the same way. Yeah. This is ridiculous. I know what right is and I know what wrong is, and I don’t want to be part of the wrong.
I want to do what’s right and let’s figure this stuff out. I’m not going to say you’re 100% right, but I sure the hell want people to listen to you and look at the facts and flush it out. Yeah. Well, I’d love to reconcile with Oli, whom I admire beyond words and. But I say if you want to get it deep into conspiracy free search and false flags, Oli Doma guard, nick colors from and I are probably the big three. Yeah, for sure. Okay, well, you have a presentation that you want to give and you have your slides.
Well, we can certainly do an intro. Sarah, let me just explain. When Amazon banned the book less than a month after it got on sale on the 22 October 2015, it had sold nearly 500 copies. Is it gonna be a runaway bestseller? So I banned it. On the 19 November. I. I was in with Rance and I was going on with Jeff, I think was that night. And I announced I was releasing it for free to the PDF. Nobody expected anyone would do something like that. I released it for free as a PDF. Rent sat it on his site forever.
A friend of mine thinks it’s been downloaded millions of times. Probably has. So they had a problem. How can they block it? How can they staunch, you know, these holes in the dike? So they brought this lawsuit, they poured over the book to try to find something they could use for a basis. And it turns out that a research college of mine by the name of Kelly Watt had been spoken to by the guy who calls himself Leonard Posner. And they had dozens, dozens, dozens of conversation. Kelly estimates it is as much as a hundred hours.
And she told him she didn’t believe a thing he said, didn’t believe he had a son, didn’t believe his son died. And one day she gets a message for. To her from. From this Posner, actually a fake. There aren’t any Posners. There’s no Noah Posner. There’s no Leonard Posner. These are legal fictions. I guarantee I know who they really are, where they came from. Ba ba ba ba. I was out to expose all that. See, when. When I was sued. Now here’s the deal. He said, go to his Google page, and there she. There she found a death certificate for Noah.
But it was incomplete. It didn’t have a file number. It didn’t have the town certification that this is accurate information. It didn’t have a state certification that this is a true copy of. So we publish it in the book. Kelly and I did a co authored chapter where we talked about it, and there are three different sentences in the book where I assert this death certificate is fake. Okay? And by the way, I’m under a court order. I can’t say today the death certificate is fake. I’m just describing the book and what set up the lawsuit.
Okay? And so I didn’t say who was responsible. I did was say was fake. And, you know, if nobody died at Sandy Hook, how could it be real? So they decided they were going to sue me by making a. By defaming Leonard Posner for claiming he had faked the desert. It wasn’t true. I hadn’t said anything about Leonard Posner in the book. But that’s the way they made it play in the courts. And to their complaint, they attached a complete death certificate, had a file number, town state certification. They listed four different sentences. Three in the book where I said it was fake, fabricated, phony, and one from another.
A memorandum about Sandy Hook, where I contributed with David Robert David Steele to produce a Sandy Hook memorandum for then President Donald Trump. And it has, gee, over 30 short chapters, only three or four pages. It’s only about 105 pages altogether. But they found one sentence where I said the same thing. And so they sued me for four sentences, three in the book and one in this memorandum for the president. Well, in my answer, I decide what to do, how to respond. Now, you can try to have it dismissed. And I could have, because they said in this complaint that there were no material differences between the one published in the book and the one they attached, which was complete, and the one I published was incomplete.
So it was based on a fraud, a fake claim. Material differences are ones that make a difference to the law. And obviously, a file number town state certification make a difference. So complaint was flawed from the beginning. So I consulted with sources about how to deal with this, and I answered by saying, you know, I began with assuming that Leonard Posner to be a real person, because by the end, I explained, this is not a real person, is actually Reuben Vabner is his name. And if that babner name resonates, because the actual half brother of Noah was Michael Vabner, who actually is the younger son of Rubhan, whose photographs as a child were used to create the fictional no apostle.
I mean, this is just so awful. So I enumerated a whole bunch of the evidence I had in the book. Sarah, you know, all this stuff, including that I had the FBI consolidated crime report for 2012 that shows at the intersection of murders and non negligent manslaughter for 2012 in Newtown. Zero, zero. The FBI saying there were no murders in Newtown in 2012. Well, Sandy Hooks, a subdivision of Newtown. So if there were no murders in Newtown, there were any murders in San Diego, right there in the FBI consolidated crime report. That has been up there for years.
It’s still up there right now. Oh, and of course, I had the manual, which was published in the book. We had the manual, the fema man. The FEMA manual for the exercise. Tells you the time. It’s crazy. It explains the entire Sandy Hook exercise in the manual. Yes. It explains why they had porta potties already in place, why there was pizza and bottled water at the firehouse. Why so many were wearing lanyards? You know, name tags on lanyards. I mean, the evidence that was in a sign that said, everyone must check in, it says, right, in the FEMA exercise, everyone must check in with a controller upon arrival.
They could be paid for their participation. It’s all there. How did they get all these people to be silent? Not. I know some. Here’s the deal. So. That’s such a good question. Eric Holder came to Newtown in 2006. The school had been closed in 2006. It was not even an elementary school. It was a special needs school. And he proposed doing this. He offered the community $114 million to participate in this scam. And the residents in the community didn’t want to be a part of it, moved out. I mean, they began planning in 2006. They didn’t pull it off until 2012.
They had auditions for roles. They signed non disclosure. He said, listen, listen to me. They signed non disclosure agreements. They don’t pay taxes. Oh. They don’t pay attention. You get free college. How do you know you’re a participant? Somebody had to have come out at least as a witness with you, or. How did you find this all out? Oh, no, no. Nobody came out as a witness with me. I’ve only in the last couple of years. I mean, this is long since. I mean, I consider these people my friends, but if I got information around out my.
Look, everyone in the San Diego community loves my book. They love it. Even Reuben Vabner likes my book. Even Reuben Vabner likes a case I’ve just filed to reopen it in Dane county. Here. They like it. He and Margaret. It was cast as Emily Parker. She’s a wizard. She’s just maybe the smartest person on earth. I’m just telling you, she’s that smart. She’s in her early twenties. She’s fabulous. She passed a bar exam without even going to law school. She got admitted to MIT without having, you know, she does these interviews and she just blows every wet away.
She was even admitted to Princeton. I’m just telling you, she’s a wizard. She’s gone through it with a fine tooth comb. She found 27 typographical words. It’s 20. It’s about 27 pages. So she found, like, what? A piece? But they love it. They think legally it’s rock solid. Okay. They love it. And as I said, I don’t know if Vicki actually went through it, too. This is now the woman who was supposed to be the dead teacher in Sandy Hook, who then died again as Eva Morales in Uvalde. And was paid 210,000. They also got, you know, 50 million for a new school.
Now, I checked it out. This is a kindergarten through fourth grade school in a cross country. It only runs seven grand, I mean, 7 million. So they got seven times 7 million. I said the time was it’s going to be the Taj Mahal of elementary schools, and it is, it’s huge, and they don’t really need it. They had a declining student population. I mean, this is all ridiculous, but that’s how it went down. The school board was involved, a local police, fire department were involved, I mean, the town attorney was involved, the town clerk was involved.
I’m telling you, this is allowed, but nobody has like a crisis of conscience where they want to come out. Are they too scared to or they. Well, they signed the NDA’s. They could be prosecuted by the government. Okay, yeah, but think about it. See, I’ve said, well, that’s pretty curious. You’re being prosecuted by the government for, for revealing that the government perpetrated a fraud and Sandy hook. I mean, how’s that going to play your life? So how do you know they signed NDAs? Did you see the NDAs? No, no, no. I’m telling you, I’ve been in contact for two, more than two years with participants, okay, that’s what I’m asking for.
They have rounded out, you know, what I understood in the book, but they love the book, they love my laws. So the participants have come, that’s what I’m saying. You have witnesses, you have participants that have come forward and have told you, told you this information. Not publicly. They’ve given the information. Well, listen to this, Sarah, maybe you should say they’re their sources. Yeah, I’m a journalist. Yeah, I’ve got sources, right? Yeah, look, I published about it, I did an Sgt report. Everyone wants to, if they’re in disbelief, SGd report called never speak of this. Never speak of this.
I lay out my relations with them, I lay it all out. I show you photographs of them today, and they’re very much not dead. I mean, they’re there and they like it. They liked it, they liked it. They argued about whether there should be one more photograph of Vicki in there. I’m telling you, she’s even gone back to school and obtained degrees under the name of Vicki Victoria Soto, which was the name of the dead teacher. She got back to school, so she must have had a crisis of consciousness that she’s actually talking to you and saying, okay, I have to, it’s coming through.
Steve who has been both of their boyfriends. I think he’s actually been engaged to both of them at different times. They have a, like, sisterly relationship. It’s fascinating. Since Steve called me, it has been the most fascinating intellectual adventure of my life to go through all this. Steve O’call. We talked for hours about what aleas development with Vicki and Margaret. And Rubin. Ed Rubin. Margaret declared us to be the fetcher four. The Fetzer four. Steve, Margaret, Vicki and me. The fetter four. I’m the spiritual advisor. The fetcher four. Wow. Okay, so it’s. It’s actually, Steve asked me, and I would gladly be his best man if he marries either of them.
I mean, I’m just telling you, it’s just a fascinating story. Sarah, you would. Fiction. This would make a really good. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Huge. Number one selling Netflix series of all time. He has. He has a photographic memory. He remembers everything. He knows more about Sandy Oak from a to z than anyone in the world today. Okay. I mean, and he’s a. I regard him as my best friend today, but I believe I regard him as my best friend today. Well, probably gives you a lot of solace, too, having somebody that you’ve went through so much crap.
Well, they reached out. He reached out to me. He called me. And then he. Then he started saying me. Stuff that Margaret had found. Like what appears to be a photo of Noah celebrating his 8th birthday. Well, he’s supposed to have died at six, but there ain’t candles on the cake. I mean, it just goes on and on and on and on and on and on. I’m telling you, I got all this. Now, they found the Connecticut FEMA schedule showing the Sandy Oak exercise, L 366, right on the schedule. They even put on a map how to get from.
How to get from where? They are in Bridgeport down to Dickinson Drive, where the school’s located. I mean, Sarah. Well, I mean, a couple of things. A school being closed, the no murders in the town, according to the FBI statistics, the FEMA manual on the schedule, the money that was given to the Eric Holder coming, and money given to this town. I mean, the non disclosure agreements with this evidence. I’d like to see all this evidence and compiled and people taking it seriously, because we may want to make this a two parter, because I can go through a whole lot of it with you.
But let me say Americans, sincere Americans, have contributed between 27 and $130 million in donations to the grieving families. But it’s all a fraud. Where is that going? Where does it go? To. Well, that’s a great question. If you divide by 26 families, that’s between one and $5 million for pretending to have lost a child in Sandy Hook. And listen, I’m told it’s still bringing in over a million bucks a month. A month. Wow. So it’s a big. It’s a big money laundering operation, man. Gosh, I just want to get to the bottom of this. I would like people to take this seriously and do it because of the American.
People deserve answers to this. Yeah. And then this Alex Jones things is really disturbing because he could bring up some of these questions and he’s not because it would blow it out of the water, but he won’t do well. I don’t understand. I’m telling you, he’s in on it. That’s what you think at this point. Yeah. How many times have I reached out to Alex Jones? Well, I think he. He’s has to be silent. Maybe he made an agreement that you need to shut up and cooperate on this. Otherwise you will get killed, or you will.
There’s some other major thing he’s, he’s doing this about. People have been killed to keep. I’m sorry. I mean, that’s right. This is. We are talking at that level of people being killed. Yeah, we are. Yeah. So do you want to do your presentation? Well, you don’t mind going along today? I. Sure. Let me tell you what I might do is just put it on my substack to have people come and watch it on my substack and I’ll post it all there. So I’ll post this and then your presentation there, and then they can go and look at it.
How does that sound? What? However you want to do it is good with me. Sarah, I’m a big fan of you and your exposure. Now, remember, tell us where people can follow you and follow this case and get your books. Yeah, I have a lot of Internet presence. I’m doing two radio shows, Monday, Wednesday, Friday on revolution radio from noon to two, a show called the Raw Deal. And then every day, five days a week on RBN, from three to five eastern, I do a show called then IC news Republic Broadcasting, where I succeeded Michael Rovero.
This was his old time slot, whole show, but I renamed it is what really happened, minus authentic news. And then, of course, you can check out my blog@jameshfetzer.org. i’m on Twitter or x at jimfetzer. And then I have a bitchute channel, Jim Fetzer, where most of my shows are archived, as will this one be. And, Sarah, I just so appreciate your interest in this issue. I mean, if state of the nation can declare this, this may be the most important case that comes before the Supreme Court in our lifetime. It makes you think there may be something to it for certain, and people need to look at it, that we can’t just brush them under the rug.
The american people deserve for this to be looked at in a realistic way versus them just throwing out the evidence, smearing the people involved. It’s turning it into a psyop, really, to get everybody to shut up. Yeah, it is. It is. It’s weaponization of the law. And it was used against Alice, it used against Donald Trump, use against me. See, what makes me different is I’m a professional scholar comes into this, and I’m much more meticulous and thorough, and then I champion collaborative research. I mean, why would anyone imagine if I brought 13 experts, including six PhDs, and we established this school had been closed by 2008, that there weren’t any students or teachers there, and we haven’t had the FEMA manual for the event, that we would be wrong? Why would they think we would be wrong? I mean, the PhD is a research credential.
It certified. You’re capable of doing top it and original research. And there were six of us on this one, Sarah. Six of us. Well, you had honest people working on it that were really trying to get the facts out. So, like I said, the american people deserve it to be taken seriously. Thank you so much for what you’re doing. Thank you for showing up, doing this with us. I really appreciate it. Well, my great pleasure, Sarah. I think you’re terrific, and you’re doing a great job, and I’m just delighted to join you on this occasion. Thank you so much.
[tr:tra].
Author
