Friday, May 9, 2014

Wolfgang Halbig / Kelly from Tulsa

Jim and Wolfgang in Sandy Hook w/Jeff Rense (first hour)
Posted by at

50 comments:

  1. UnknownMay 10, 2014 at 5:18 PM

    Late in his career, Mark Twain wrote a short story that was a devastating exposé of corruption in a small American town. The name of the story is "The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg" (1900).

    The time spent by Jim and Wolfgang has already paid dividends in uncovering the sad underbelly of a world that would even shock such an insightful soul as Mark Twain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. psheaMay 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM

      great story. thanks james. isn't it interesting that at the end of the story the line "At nine I will call for the sack, and at eleven will deliver the rest of the ten thousand...'' appears? twain, of course, had insider knowledge and also was featured on the front of sergeant pepper's....east is east and west is west, and maybe the twain will meet yet?
      this is a spiritual game, and sandy hook is the 'gimme on a platter' chance card. nothing left to chance though, except our free will choices. do no harm.

      Delete
    2. UnknownMay 12, 2014 at 7:28 PM

      Pshea,

      Thanks for your good commentary on Mark Twain’s story. Another detail from the narrative is that out of the shame of the debacle, the small town decides to give itself a new name, as if that gesture will help to reform the disgraceful value system of its citizens.

      Similarly, in the Newtown affair, the locals decided to tear down the Sandy Hook elementary school, as if that gesture would erase the past memories.

      Nature abhors a vacuum, and the truth has a way of coming to light whether the town is called Hadleyburg or Newtown.

      Delete
  2. UnknownMay 10, 2014 at 7:39 PM

    Remember the Dancer Who Lost Her Leg and Recovered Almost Immediately? Here's Her Story:

    ? Meet Adrianne Haslet - Well Connected Dancing Ski Bunny Bomb Traitor - YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-ZCFJ_JPYM

    According to the video, her family is connected to Northrop Grumman. (Didn't those doing research on "vicsims" find many family connections to the military/industrial complex as well? I thought this was also the case with Sandy Hook families.)
    _________________________________
    They are keeping us "secure."
    *Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in unmanned systems, cyber, C4ISR, and logistics and modernization to government and commercial customers worldwide.

    *The security solutions we provide help secure freedoms for our nation as well as those of our allies. Squarely meeting our obligations, fiscally and technologically, isn't just a business goal, but a moral imperative.......




    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownMay 11, 2014 at 8:01 AM

    Joan,

    Thank you for providing the youtube link about Adrianne Haslet, the dancer.

    I have followed Adrianne's story closely on the mainstream media's coverage. I do not find the youtube video to be convincing. It is entirely based on speculation about her clothing as apparent in the various photos.

    The video’s narration also makes use of “special pleading,” as it ignores the totality of the evidence that Adrianne was at the scene of the bombing and was taken the hospital. We have photos, film footage, and interviews of Adrianne with with Dr. Ron Medzon, the emergency physician who treated her at the Boston Medical Center.

    There is too much evidence implying that Adrianne was actually admitted to the hospital following the bombing incident. And, as we all know, it is not easy to conceal an actual stay in a hospital, especially with the media attention given to the Boston Marathon bombing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. UnknownMay 11, 2014 at 8:07 AM

    It is an instructive experience to compare the Boston Marathon event with Sandy Hook.

    With the BMB tragedy, we have the survivors to interview and carefully study to verify that an actual bombing did occur.

    By contrast, the Sandy Hook event is filled with vague and insubstantial evidence about the alleged victims, as raised in the good questions of Professor Fetzer and Wolfgang Halbig.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim FetzerMay 12, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      James, I am a huge fan, but the Boston bombing was the most blatant false flag attack in US history. See, for example, "Free Your Mind - Jim Fetzer" (YouTube) where I begin with the Boston bombing, do Osama bin Laden and some JFK, then end with Sandy Hook. I have a lot on it, such as "The Boston Bombing: New Hampshire vs. Jim Fetzer".

      Delete
    2. UnknownMay 12, 2014 at 6:37 PM

      Agreed. And those were all great articles that I have studied with care!

      I do believe that researching the Boston bombing event will yield the most results by focusing on the Tsarnaev brothers. In the JFK case, an understanding of Oswald eventually leads us to his framers, who were in turn responsible for the assassination. The same will be true with the BMB trial….if the younger Tsarnaev brother ever gets a trial.

      I don't believe that focusing on the dancer Adrianne Haslet will bring clarity to the Boston event. The youtube video on Haslet (mentioned at the top of this thread) was not persuasive.

      This subtopic gets us back to your excellent debate with A.J. MacDonald. One of the callers identified as “Jeannon” raised the essential issue about injuries and deaths to the bystanders in Boston. Jeannon's point was a valid one. Beyond a reasonable doubt, there were casualties in Boston, and it would be a tall order to prove otherwise.

      The Boston Marathon bombing could have been a false flag event, yet still included collateral damage to innocent people like Adrianne Haslet.

      Delete
    3. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 5:03 AM

      Focusing on the Tsarnaev brothers and the trial will be a waste of time. If the trial even takes place, the only thing going to be revealed is what they want revealed. The Tsarnaev brothers could also be actors in this whole play themselves.

      Ignoring the actors in this play, like Adrienne and Jeff etc etc is ignoring some of the best evidence available that this whole thing was nothing more than a hoax.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousMay 13, 2014 at 6:25 AM

      James Norwood:
      " One of the callers identified as “Jeannon” raised the essential issue about injuries and deaths to the bystanders in Boston. Jeannon's point was a valid one. Beyond a reasonable doubt, there were casualties in Boston, and it would be a tall order to prove otherwise."

      When I called in to the show, I did not express myself clearly and therefore you misinterpreted the point I was trying to make, which was...
      The print media is saying that 14 to 16 people lost one or both legs in the BMB.
      The first case we were told about was the Jeff Bauman bilateral leg amputations, and as Dr. Fetzer explained in that radio show, that case was incredible enough, totally unbelievable. But as incredible was the fact that the official story of BMB injuries was greatly expanded to say that 14 to 16 people experienced one or both legs amputations from the BMB event.

      The blatant Big Lie of the BMB was made even more of an in-our-faces Big Lie.
      I have looked in to each of these cases in a cursory way and as expected, nothing pans out or as Dr. Fetzer would say, nothing "hangs together."

      Read more at...

      http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?77156-Sixteen-Boston-Bombing-leg-Amputees-VicSims-Amputee-Crisis-Actors

      Sixteen Boston Bombing leg Amputees / VicSims / Amputee Crisis Actors ?

      Delete
    5. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 7:35 AM

      Amanda and Jeannon:

      Thank you for your replies. I appreciate the courteous manner in which you have made your points, and I want to keep an open mind to all possibilities in this case.

      In assessing the official story of the Boston bombings, I personally cannot casually dismiss the massive coverage of little Martin Richard. There is incontrovertible photographic evidence that he was right on the street at the time of the bombing and subsequently lost his life. In turn, his sister was one of the amputee victims. This article sums up their story and includes the photo:

      http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/martin-richard-family-healing-year-bomb-article-1.1755927

      Are you suggesting that Martin Richard was not at the Boston marathon event and that his entire family is a fictional creation of the mainstream media? Without more evidence to support that assertion, there will not be a critical mass of support for the thesis that the bombing itself was a hoax.

      I concur that the Jeff Bauman story is suspicious. Thus far, however, I have seen no concrete evidence to suggest that Adrienne Haslet and Martin Richard were not real victims of the event. It is one thing to suggest that the official story doesn't hold together. It is quite another to state that the event was completely staged with "crisis actors."

      Delete
    6. AnonymousMay 13, 2014 at 9:01 AM

      " It is one thing to suggest that the official story doesn't hold together. It is quite another to state that the event was completely staged with "crisis actors."

      What I wrote was that my cursory research or investigations regarding the amputee victims does not "hold together." What I have found in the few name search sites found that the "story" that is told about the subject amputee from those records does not hold or hang together.

      I never stated that "the event was completely staged with "crisis actors.", though that possibility cannot be ruled out based on current level of true facts from quality sources.

      The pervasive and extreme degree of falsification of internet legends on these victims tells me that ALL videos and still photographs must be called into serious question.

      http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/05/05/newtown-school-board-the-newtown-bee-complicit-in-the-sandy-hook-hoax/

      Preston James, Ph.D
      May 5, 2014 - 8:36 pm
      Truly outstanding article. Prof. Fetzer has shown conclusively that Sandy Hook was a hoax, there were NO DEAD KIDS, NO DEAD TEACHERS. And it would be no surprise if there was NO ADAM LANZA, his mother or father either, all virtually created.

      ...

      But this “controversy” has an easy solution. Exhume all imaginary bodies, DNA test all so-called parents, subpoena all birth and school records of parents and children, track all prior homes, jobs, schooling degrees, SS records, Tax returns, etc. and all legal records and watch the liars bs unravel instantly. "

      Delete
    7. AnonymousMay 13, 2014 at 9:06 AM

      This "easy solution" suggested by Dr. James regarding Sandy Hook is also the method and solution to confirming the true identities of the alleged 14 to 16 amputee victims of BMB.

      Delete
    8. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 10:29 AM

      The only evidence that Martin was at the Marathon is a very low resolution photo, which can be easily faked. That is the same for his family who might be a real family, I have no idea. If the bombs were not very powerful and the damage in the areas surrounding the bombs seem to suggest that they were not, then no one could have been killed. If the shrapnel was not able to cause damage to some paper signs and flags then it is a ludicrous suggestion that they could have ripped someones leg off let alone killed them. Jeffs story is a lot more than suspicious, it is an impossibility and there is as far as im aware no evidence that even places Adrienne at the scene. Adrienne was interviewed in hospital days after the event looking anything but the victim of a traumatic injury like having your leg blown off. She didnt even look like she was on any painkillers. She looked absolutely overjoyed for some reason. I would say in my opinion of course that the whole event was staged from the bomb to the victims.

      Delete
    9. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 10:52 AM

      Jeannon and Amanda,

      Thanks for hanging in with me on some important issues related to the Boston bombings.

      Jeannon: You raise a very important point when you write, “The pervasive and extreme degree of falsification of internet legends on these victims tells me that ALL videos and still photographs must be called into serious question.”

      Unfortunately, those photographs and the video footage are being used by the internet writers to call into question whether or not there were casualties and victims in Boston. The youtube video on Adrienne Haslet mentioned at the top of this thread relied exclusively on photographs. The blog that you endorsed (“Sixteen-Boston-Bombing-leg-Amputees-VicSims-Amputee-Crisis-Actors”) includes writers who invariably return to the photos for their “evidence” of a hoax. In her follow-up note, Amanda is relying on the photo of Adrienne in the hospital to conclude that she looks “absolutely overjoyed for some reason” and does not appear to be on painkillers. Even the photo of little Martin Richard is suspect because it “is a very low resolution photo, which can be easily faked.”

      So, on the one hand, ALL the photos must be called into question. But on the other hand, the photos are being used almost as the exclusively evidence suggesting that the BMB was a staged event. I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both ways.

      The exhumation of bodies and DNA testing of people associated with either the Boston or Newton events is not a realistic goal in getting to the truth. Quite simply, that is not going to happen. Look what happened to Jim and Wolfgang merely by showing up in Newtown to ask some polite questions. I believe we can understand the truth about these two events, but not the way suggested by Preston James.

      For Newtown, Wolfgang Halbig has the right idea in the legal arena to make use of the subpoena for the local and federal officials to answer his questions in court.

      For Boston bombing, some of best traditional research I have seen is that of Russ Baker, who has generated new information about the Tsarnaev brothers. In writing above, Amanda believes that a study of the brothers is a waste of time. But I think Russ is opening some doors, especially with his study of the curious witness named “Danny.”

      Thanks, Jeannon and Amanda. I have appreciated your views and insights.

      Delete
    10. AnonymousMay 13, 2014 at 11:48 AM

      James Norwood…
      “So, on the one hand, ALL the photos must be called into question. But on the other hand, the photos are being used almost as the exclusively evidence suggesting that the BMB was a staged event. I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both ways.”

      I do not want it “both ways.” But what you have set out in your faulty reasoning is not “both ways.” I think the logical fallacy you have employed here is called “false dichotomy.” (In your previous posting you misrepresented two things I wrote and that was the “straw man” logical fallacy.)

      James Norwood…
      “the photos are being used almost as the exclusively evidence suggesting that the BMB was a staged event”

      The only way we can prove the official story not true is by looking at all the official surface “evidence”, including MSM videos and photos, and showing that even the official photos and videos taken at face value are not true and correct representations of anything. “Taking at face value” means just a cursory look at the photos, not an in-depth look. This first stage of showing the official story to be false is NOT the same as showing the event was a staged event. Other analysis and proofs must be sought to prove it was a staged event. All we can say at this first stage is that the official story is not true.

      There are other factors that cause serious suspicion regarding the truthfulness of the official story such as much cover-up behavior by the officials and media, but I think having the videos and photos (and their media sources and in what venue they were presented to the public) is a more concrete way to point out obvious flaws and fakery.

      When I write that we need to call into serious question all the videos and photos of the BMB, I mean that we need to go beyond just proving them false, and proving the official story false, based on their face value. I mean we need to analyze them much more deeply. That is what the best investigators for BMB truth have done. They have “taken apart” every aspect of every photo and every video and revealed many more detailed in-depth facts about those videos and photos. Those deeper facts are the basis of further investigations. Again, this is not having it “both ways.” This is first using the photos to prove the official story false using their very own “evidence.” It is then using those same photos to find clues as to the deeper methods of the deception. It is not a matter of analyzing the photos or not analyzing the photos. It is a matter of analyzing the photos in a deeper way for a deeper purpose.

      I think obtaining solid, “sure fire” proof that even just one BMB amputee victim is not who he or she was presented to us as and proof of the person’s real identity would be an excellent way to prove that the Boston Marathon Bombing event was a staged event, not a real event.

      Delete
    11. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 12:43 PM

      I can do better than a photo of Adrienne in the hospital. Here is a link to a video of the interview with Anderson Cooper.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHdjCWmPLzA

      The photos that I am talking about that show the lack of damage are photos from the Boston Globe.

      http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/16/photos-scenes-from-boston-marathon-explosions/WX6BrGiSlAZySqfbGjATjO/picture.html

      Delete
    12. AnonymousMay 20, 2014 at 10:10 AM

      I think that isolating the actors in these events is easily the most effective evidence proving they are agenda driven false flag operations. The research exposing these individuals provides instant credibility and also puts a name and a face to create a list for further prosecution in the future. If enough pressure can be placed on a single participating actor it could cause them to flip and become a REAL witness causing a dam breaking flood of testimony of those trying to save their neck . I read these mind numbing dissertations of individuals who seem more concerned with promoting their personal "take" and then writing thousands of words defending their glorious intelligent findings. I don't know if Jim and Wolfgang's motives in going to Newtown are genuine but this would be a step in the right direction. The scene at the School Board meeting to me seems surreal and scripted similar to the IRS hearings which appear to be designed to drag out to obscurity the process indefinitely while giving the appearance someone is on the case.

      Delete
  5. UnknownMay 11, 2014 at 9:04 AM

    it is also instructive to compare the boston and sandy hook hoaxes to the bp spill, the penn state settlement, the batman shooting, the hokie hoax, the tarp hoax (pay czar), and of course the 911 scam.

    there is a connection between all of the above scams; and it's the chairman of the board of the jfk library foundation and former ted kennedy senate chief of staff- his name his ken feinberg.

    oh and by the way, if you want to know the market value of let's say a fake film of a presidential assassination or the value of holo-hoax slave labor; just ask ken. he's an expert on those scams as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousMay 20, 2014 at 1:20 PM

      Now you're talking, but thats wayyyy too simple for this bunch. We need to go to Kens house and measure his driveway, get some DNA samples from a discarded cigarette butt and prove to the world he lives there and then endlessly debate the test results. Once that is it is proven the photographs of him are not CGI or photo shopped and that his house mortgage wasn't signed on Christmas we may proceed. What was the question?

      Delete
  6. UnknownMay 11, 2014 at 9:38 AM

    James,

    The link Joan provided is more for people who believe the Bombing was a staged event. It would not convince anyone that the bombing was staged.

    James said:
    The video’s narration also makes use of “special pleading,” as it ignores the totality of the evidence that Adrianne was at the scene of the bombing

    Could you provide a link to some of that evidence of Adrienne at the scene?

    James said:
    There is too much evidence implying that Adrianne was actually admitted to the hospital following the bombing incident

    No one denies that she was in the hospital. Being in the hospital is not proof of a bomb or proof that she had her leg blown off. She was giving interviews from the hospital, so was not trying to conceal the fact she was in a hospital. Some people might think that giving interviews from the hospital proves that a bomb went off or that she had her leg blown off, it does not.

    Check out Carlos the survivor.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHWkRj5JfMc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. coincidenceskepticMay 11, 2014 at 11:50 PM

      What do we ever "really" know?
      As for the suspected "perp" presented to the viewer as Adrianne - very little.
      We know that a series of 2 dimensional images of a digital representation of a humanoid in front of a background suggesting a hospital room with equipment - functional medically or as props - has been aired.
      We start by looking at the video production quality and digital artifacts left over from errors in rendering which would indicate CGI and possible fakery.
      Checking for CGI would not have been a priority for me but, someone pointed out some Sandy Hook videos that were clearly altered. Nelba Marquez-Greene in a cemetery scene has a nose that jumps around like a rabbit's, is one example. The Singing Rabbi of Sandy Hook was interesting in that he has no front teeth - except in one frame where the renderer did not remove them.
      Assuming that there is no visible tampering, and no green screen in "Adrianne's" scene - everything else is assumption.
      We assume "Adrianne" is a female. The interviewer appears to assume the same. Probably a safe assumption.
      She appears to be missing a limb - probably a safe assumption as well.
      Is it a hospital room or a studio set? We don't know where or even when it was filmed.
      We make assumptions about visual and auditory cues that are consistent with past experience and the narrative. We assume a hospital setting when we hear the word "Doctor" paged over and over. We assume a scene is outdoors and at night when we hear crickets.
      Now that we realize how much fakery had gone on in the past, we really need to start our investigations with every element stripped of all extraneous embellishments which taint the process and distract - which is the very purpose of most of the "Facts" the "Plot Development Team / Script Writers" introduce with every "episode" for every "series" until it is "cancelled."
      Soap Opera....Psy Opera...The show is never over because no one is "singing." Just another act for the "Circus" that keeps the masses from concentrating on who is behind the curtain, what they are really up to, what is their motive, and how do we stop them from achieving the horrific goals of the
      seriously messed up agenda that's been unfolding... fast enough now for more people to take notice.

      Delete
  7. AnonymousMay 11, 2014 at 10:02 AM

    Thanks, Jim, for your continued efforts in shedding light on this extremely suspicious event. However, I wish you'd stop citing the WayBackMachine as proof that there was no computer activity at Sandy Hook. It is not. For example, it's entirely possible (though unlikely in this day and age) for a computer to NOT have an internet connection. So to claim there was NO COMPUTER ACTIVITY at Sandy Hook based only on data found on the WayBackMachine is misguided.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousMay 11, 2014 at 10:05 AM

    There Wolgang Halbig is criticising the United Way for taking donations and then there he is appealing for donations. He's an opportunist. And there Jeff Rense is saying "Where do we tell people to go to donate?" NO! DON'T GIVE ANYTHING TO WOLFGANG HALBIG OR THE UNITED WAY. IT'S ALL ONE BIG FRAUD. Wolfgang Halbig says "We don't just want your money..." How about you get NONE OF MY MONEY YOU ROTTEN SON OF A BITCH

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim FetzerMay 12, 2014 at 1:47 PM

      This is ridiculous. Wolf is seeking donations to bring legal actions to expose the truth. Those who are seeking donations for Sandy Hook survivors are participants in the scam. I am taken aback by this nasty attack on Wolf, which I repudiate.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousMay 13, 2014 at 10:01 AM

      I am not totally against WH. He does have some valid points. I just want the money grubbing to stop. Let him use his own money if he is truly seeking the truth. No one should be making a business out of this.

      Delete
    3. Ian GreenhalghMay 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

      It takes a lot of money to pursue things though the US legal system, hence the fundraising.

      Delete
    4. UnknownMay 13, 2014 at 1:20 PM

      Thats true.

      Sending email to your congressman and using harsh language on blogs has been very efficacious against the darkest tyranny mankind has yet known during this current phase of civilization.

      So let us not support this man and his quest for truth but instead retire to the couch, pop open a favorite beverage and watch tv for some clue as to what is considered cool this month and should be purchased next.

      Although Im sure we agree, somebody needs to do something about all this messy stuff Jim and his guests keep rattling on about

      Delete
    5. AnonymousMay 14, 2014 at 8:44 AM

      We don't have to pursue anything through the legal system. All that does is make the lawyers rich. What do you think they are going to do? Come out and admit it? We already know it was a hoax. Pursuing some legal case is not going to do anything. A lot of times these fund raisers don't do what they said they were going to do and just pocket the money.

      Delete
    6. UnknownMay 17, 2014 at 8:17 PM

      The purpose of pursuing it through the 'legal' system, is to confront this matter head on, as Wolf and Jim attempted, and then, as happened with that attempt, the gullible public will start to see that they've been stonewalled and deceived.

      Delete
  9. TessanMay 11, 2014 at 11:41 AM

    Guys, make sure to make copies of the tapes and spread with different people and different places as an insurance...

    ReplyDelete
  10. barrybMay 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

    Why would you say Wolfgang is a fraud. He's obviously making a brave and earnest effort. His point was that only a small percentage of your donation to the United Way makes it to the needy. Like many large charities, they pay big executive salaries. At a former workplace, they strong armed everyone to give to the United Way out of every pay check. I went along with it for a significant paycheck donation. After learning more about the United Way, I wanted to stop my donations. They made it very difficult to do so and even had people argue with me about it and try to talk me out of it. F that! I decided 'No' so stop taking my money! /it's disgusting how numerous companies strong arm people into giving to the United Way.There are many, many worthwhile charities. I consider Wolfgang's effort one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. coincidenceskepticMay 11, 2014 at 3:15 PM

    The first Sandy Hook related "real" death occurred today. Whilst listening to this interview and being reminded of the many fine displays of media terrorist actions by the nation's "journalists", I choked to death on my own vomit.
    Well. I never got to live like a rock star...but, at least I got to die like one!
    Hey, my donation site accepts bit coins now. Sweeet.
    Recently, I saw that Gov. Malloy had aced his first test on Public Speaking for Presidential Candidates. Complete with mumbling, divisive ad hominem attacks against critical thinkers, shameless lying...A brilliant performance.
    Next test - Smoking Crack with Older White Johns. I'm sure he'll do just fine...so, congratulations America. Meet your next Top Sock Puppet.
    Wikipedia - "As a child, Malloy suffered from learning disabilities and difficulties with motor coordination. He did not learn to tie his shoes until the fifth grade. Malloy eventually was diagnosed with dyslexia..." Sounds like the bio of a sheep dipped c grade actor weaseling his way through politics to me.
    Whatever. Gotta go get ready for my "funeral."
    out

    ReplyDelete
  12. UnknownMay 12, 2014 at 7:40 PM

    I viewed the online recording of the Newtown school board meeting attended by Professor Fetzer and Wolfgang Halbig on May 5, 2014.

    The only member of the Newtown community to speak at this meeting identified himself as "Jim Fitzpatrick." This man wanted to express his frustration at what he called the "circus" coming to town that, in his words, included everything from "shamanism to Halloween."

    In fact, visitors like Jim and Wolfgang were exceedingly respectful and polite, merely raising questions and exercising their democratic rights. There was nothing disruptive or confrontational to warrant the astonishing comments of Mr. Fitzpatrick.

    The video recording of the school board meeting may be accessed at this site:

    http://www.newtown-ct.gov/Public_Documents/NewtownCT_WebDocs/videoarchivent

    ReplyDelete
  13. UnknownMay 14, 2014 at 10:32 PM

    Is everyone forgetting the Boston Marathon was a DRILL? The runners were told not to worry about the "explosions" as they were part of a drill. (There were better articles than this one below, but it's the only one I could find quickly.)

    BMB WAS A DRILL

    (NaturalNews) It has been about two months now since multiple pressure cooker bombs went off near the finish line of the 2013 Boston Marathon, an event that triggered a massive show of police state force as hordes of armed SWAT troopers marched the streets of suburban Boston in search of the patsies. And a recent Boston Globe report openly admits that the entire charade was completely staged, having been planned months in advance as part of a Department of Homeland Security (DHS)-funded exercise targeting patriots and militiamen as terrorists.

    An attempted cover for the actual false flag event that allegedly killed three people back in April, the DHS-funded drill, known as "Operation Urban Shield," was intended to take place during the summer, according to the Boston Globe - that is until the "real" event beat it to the punch......

    Backpacks, hats with strange skull emblems, non-Islamic fall guys to take the blame - all of these elements just so happened to be present the day of the actual attacks, which is quite interesting in light of the fact that false flag events of the past also coordinated with almost identical drills that were intended to be conducted around the exact same time. The 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York are a perfect example of this, as a nearly identical drill involving terrorists flying planes into buildings was set to occur at the exact same time.

    http://www.naturalnews.com/040898_boston_marathon_false_flag_terror_drills.html#ixzz31l3jEqzV

    ReplyDelete
  14. UnknownMay 14, 2014 at 10:57 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. UnknownMay 14, 2014 at 11:07 PM

    James Norwood,

    You write very neatly and you sound logical. But, has it occurred to you that your are making a huge assumption that the so-called "bombs" were real? Your thesis only works if those were real explosives. The law of probability can prove you false.

    What is the probability that a bomb placed in a trash container near the sidewalk curb would explode in an asymmetrical fashion damaging only the bystanders on one side and not the other and that it would not blow apart everything within its radius such as the fence, the runners crossing the finish line as well as the storefronts in the background?

    What is the probability that a homemade bomb would cause sixteen of the bystanders' legs to be blown off? --no arms, torsos, hands, heads--just legs? What are the odds of that? Does anyone know an actuary who could figure out the probability of that happening?

    ReplyDelete
  16. UnknownMay 15, 2014 at 8:18 AM

    Joan,

    I appreciate you taking the time to write, and I want to keep an open mind to all possibilities in the Boston marathon event.

    The major problem I perceive with the writing on this thread is that the discussion lapses into pure speculation with no factual support for the writers' assertions.

    One area that it not being explored is eyewitness testimony. You raise an excellent point about the curious "asymmetrical" explosion. This matter can be resolved by interviewing the scores of people who were present at the scene and can describe in detail the extent of the explosion. To date, I have not read a single account of an eyewitness that calls into question the premise that the bombs were "real."

    The unending speculation on the internet focuses almost exclusively on photographic and film evidence. The bloggers make wild assertions about fake blood and crisis actors. But when the photos reveal evidence of little Martin Richard at the scene, the bloggers then claim that the image was "photoshopped." For the bloggers, the photographic evidence is both "all and nothing" simultaneously. This is insubstantial and seriously flawed research, scholarship, and critical thinking.

    In the JFK assassination, the unprecedented degree to which this case has been studied has led us to the truth, and the key area has been in eyewitness testimony. The testimony of people standing and observing the incident in Dealey Plaza has led us to realize that the films and photos are suspect. The testimony of medical professionals at Parkland and Bethesda have revealed the truth about the direction of the gunshots and the flaws of the autopsy. The same focus on eyewitnesses will help us peel away the layers and get to the truth of the event in Boston.

    So, let's get out there and conduct those interviews, so that we are dealing not merely in probabilities, but in reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 15, 2014 at 11:57 AM

      Their are lots of problems with eyewitnesses. Sometimes they can be wrong, sometimes they exaggerate and sometimes they can be liars. I would be interested to see what eyewitnesses you are talking about. Here is one eyewitness who has been exposed as a liar.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHWkRj5JfMc

      The singular photo showing Martin at the marathon is very poor quality and could be faked, but it also could be real. If real, the only thing that it proves is that he was at the marathon.

      I would say that the bomb that went off had no shrapnel in it, and was not very powerful at all, certainly not powerful enough to be blowing the legs clean off people. The photos I am going to provide links for, prove that beyond all reasonable doubt.

      Photo 1 shows wooden barriers yards from the bomb, undamaged. It also shows wooden tables yards from the bomb, undamaged but the real clincher is the advertisement tied to the wooden barrier made from paper, undamaged. Had the bomb had shrapnel in it and been powerful enough to rip legs off then this would have been an impossibility.
      http://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/04/16/scenes-from-boston-marathon-bombing/EY9gbwqWctTW1UbqM2A93H/story.html?pic=1

      Photo 2 shows flags and advertisements totally undamaged by any shrapnel. Had the bomb had any shrapnel in it, this would be an impossibility.
      http://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/04/16/scenes-from-boston-marathon-bombing/EY9gbwqWctTW1UbqM2A93H/story.html?pic=9

      Photo 3 shows a double glazed window with one sheet still glazed. If the bomb had shrapnel in it, this would be an impossibility.
      http://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/04/16/scenes-from-boston-marathon-bombing/EY9gbwqWctTW1UbqM2A93H/story.html?pic=21

      I have reached my limit for free articles at the Boston Globe for the month. Them 3 photos prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the bomb that went off at the finishing line had no shrapnel in it and was not anywhere near powerful enough to blow peoples legs off.

      If what you think happened to JFK is based on eyewitnesses and the testimony of people then if them people are wrong or are telling lies then what you think about the event will be flawed. Photo and video as long as it has not been tampered with is the best available evidence and is far better than witness testimony.




      Delete
  17. Richard CharninMay 15, 2014 at 10:00 AM

    JFK Dealey Plaza Eyewitness Surveys of the Source of Shots: Debunking John McAdams http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/jfk-dealey-plaza-witnesses-john-mcadams-strange-list/

    ReplyDelete
  18. UnknownMay 15, 2014 at 5:04 PM

    "So, let's get out there and conduct those interviews, so that we are dealing not merely in probabilities, but in reality.".......James Norwood

    Probability IS reality, James. In the case of a bomb explosion, experts would be able to tell us the likelihood of the explosion pattern of a homemade bomb. If the BM bomb did not fit the expected pattern and by what odds, that would be evidence that it could not have done the damage reported in the news media.

    In the case of the sixteen legs alleged to have been blown off by said explosive, we need not have experts to calculate the odds of all injuries being to the leg. Anyone can calculate these odds using a mathematical formula.

    I'd say the odds or probability that the amputees being up and cheerfully walking around, with no signs of post traumatic stress or bodily weakness, is about zero.

    Math Planet - Probabilities
    http://www.mathplanet.com/education/algebra-2/discrete-mathematics-and-probability/probabilities

    "One cannot discern outcomes in all situations, for example whether we will get heads or tails when tossing a coin. We cannot foresee how the coin will land as it is decided by chance. However, if we were to toss the coin infinite times, then half of the results will be heads and half will be tails"

    ReplyDelete
  19. Linda PackerMay 15, 2014 at 9:46 PM

    We cannot use witness testimony as evidence in these events anymore. Do not focus on the witnesses. Focus instead on the concrete evidence or lack of it. Witnesses can be coopted. That is the last place we should look for evidence of a case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 20, 2014 at 1:31 AM

      Linda,

      Eyewitness testimony is fundamental to any inquiry about a crime, and long before the advent of forensic science, eyewitness observations were the foundation for truth seeking.

      The problem with focusing exclusively on such "concrete" evidence as the photos is that the evidence is being used selectively to support the wild, unfounded, misguided, and unconvincing perceptions that are being put forth on this thread.

      Delete
    2. UnknownMay 20, 2014 at 2:15 AM

      The photo evidence is not being used selectively. A photo of a person standing beside a road is not proof of death. That photo if it has not been tampered with only proves that Martin was at the marathon. When we are dealing with crimes in which the government could be complicit then you have to be careful giving to much credit to eyewitness because the government can call on so many people to pose as eyewitnesses and it is impossible to tell for certain if they are telling the truth. What eyewitnesses are you talking about?, you have presented none. You said people were lapsing into pure speculation with no factual support for the writers' assertions. I presented facts, with HQ photographs from the Boston Globe as evidence and you just ignored them. You were happy to reply until I presented some facts then you choose to ignore them. I would suggest that you are selective in what comments you reply too, choosing to ignore facts that you can not counter. Facts which counter the theory that you believe is true. You have presented no evidence to support anything that you have said, only a photo of a wee boy standing beside the road as proof of death.

      Delete
  20. AnonymousMay 19, 2014 at 10:18 PM

    Apparently these criminals in Newtown don't appear to be too worried as they pretty much hold all the cards care. The media is available to be used in multiple ways as needed. The police are available to be used in multiple ways as needed. The School Board doesn't really care about your silly questions..yawn.. trying to get answers about your "conspiracy theories". Hey the United Way and a bunch of shell charities made millions off the gullible sheeple proving our mind control techniques work quite nicely. I mean the best we can ever hope to do is to endlessly debate the nuances of how they pulled off the scam. Bottom line is they sit in enormous French Chateaus, spending their idle time in Cannes, while we spend ours wondering which one of us is a shill.

    ReplyDelete
  21. UnknownMay 20, 2014 at 8:44 AM

    Thanks to Amanda, Joan, Linda, and Jeannon for your comments. I appreciate the time you have taken, and I acknowledge your dedication to discovering the truth about important events like Boston and Sandy Hook. It is clear that we all share the goal of penetrating the layers of obfuscation from the mainstream media in order to arrive at the truth.

    Quite honestly, I believe this thread has been one of the most instructive on Jim's site, due to the high caliber of the comments and the civilized manner in which they have unfolded over the past week.

    I have only one final quote to offer about the nature of eyewitness testimony, as it pertains to the legal arena. The quote is from David Mantik, who cites the work of researcher Millicent Cranor, as follows:

    "For photographic information to be accepted as evidence in court, the images must be vouched for, and their whereabouts ascertained at all times. The legal principle is that eyewitness testimony has priority over photographs."

    This quote was drawn from Professor Fetzer's volume of essays entitled "Assassination Science" (p. 265). The passage is instructive in that it ties together one of our discussion topics, namely the importance of linking the photographs and the eyewitness testimony in order to understand the totality of the evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 20, 2014 at 12:57 PM

      This is not a court of law, it is the comments section of a blog. If the photographic evidence and the eyewitness were to contradict each other, their is no doubt that the photographic evidence would take priority. If your going to talk about legal principle, it would be better citing a legal expert. The photos that I linked too were from the Boston Globe, some were included in the Boston Globes Pulitzer Prize winning breaking news articles and would no doubt be accepted as evidence in a court of law .

      Delete
  22. David HowardMay 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM

    Google "Michelle Obama is a man" https://vimeo.com/88910386

    ReplyDelete
  23. norwegianJune 19, 2014 at 12:47 PM

    Jim Fetzer wrote:

    "This is ridiculous. Wolf is seeking donations to bring legal actions to expose the truth."

    Jim, I'm afraid that your Wolf buddy has been roundly exposed for the clown / con artist / liar / utter fraud that he is - and quite comprehensively so :

    "Wolfgang Halbig is a LIAR (Part 1 of 3)" :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqC3c73XHX4


    Halbig & Fetzer go to Newtown:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHSs9gjrbSA

    ReplyDelete
  24. IFAMarch 6, 2015 at 8:35 AM

    for long stay motel in Telsa visit
    Long term Stay motel in tulsa ok

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)