Fluoride Information

Fluoride is a poison. Fluoride was poison yesterday. Fluoride is poison today. Fluoride will be poison tomorrow. When in doubt, get it out.


An American Affidavit

Saturday, May 10, 2014

The Newtown School Board meeting and the meaning of silence by Jim Fetze from Veterans Today


 
Friday, May 9th, 2014 | Posted by

The Newtown School Board meeting and the meaning of silence

by Jim Fetzer


“The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are those with something to hide” – Barack Obama (2010)
Redacted FBI report on Sandy HookLet’s start with the FBI.  It has now released its report about Sandy Hook, which has been so massively redacted that it looks worse than a chunk of swiss cheese.  So what does the FBI have to hide about Sandy Hook?
As Dave Altimari reports in The Hartford Courant, “Of the 175 pages released in response to a Courant Freedom of Information request, 64 were completely redacted and most of the other 111 pages were heavily redacted.”
If the official account of a single demented shooter taking out 20 children and 6 adults on 14 December 2012 were true, there would be nothing to redact.  He came, he shot, he died.  There should be no more to it than that. So there has to be more to it than that.
This is reminiscent of the Warren Commission’s decision to classify documents and records about the death of JFK for 75 years on the ground of “national security”.  After all, if a lone demented shooter had committed that crime with 3 lucky shots, then there is no “national security” aspect to the case. So what’s going on?
Wolfgang Halbig, a former Florida State Trooper, public school administrator and nationally recognized expert on school safety, and I traveled to Newtown to confront the Newtown School Board with some of our findings and questions for the board.  Like the FBI, they stonewalled us and adopted the strategy of silence:
Skeptics met with silence
There are many reasons to believe that their approach (of benign neglect) is not going to work. Articles have appeared in The Connecticut Post and The Stamford Advocate, which are especially striking for the posted comments, where there has been at least as much support for us as criticism. And there is much, much more.

My statement to the Board


In my statement to the board, I identified myself as a former Marine Corps officer, a retired professor and a journalist for Veterans Today. I explained that, in the course of my research, I had discovered that Sandy Hook Elementary School was an outstanding school with a 10/10 rating, that it covered K-4 and that it had 626 students. I explained that that rather astonished me, because if you subtract 20 for the students who were killed, that leaves 606. But where were they at the time of this event? We don’t see them anywhere and, if you assume that buses carry 48-50 students apiece, then it would have taken at least a dozen buses to evacuate them. But nothing like that is visible in any of the footage that was taken on the scene that day.
     I also observed that some of the reasons we are concerned include that the final report from the Connecticut State Police does not include the names, the ages or the sex of any of the victims; that the Clerk of Newtown entered into secret negotiations with the state legislature to avoid having to release death certificates for those who were killed; that the Attorney General of Connecticut sought to prevent the release of the 911 calls; and that those who were hired for the demolition of the building were required to accept “life-time gag orders” that prohibit them from ever discussing what they saw or did not see during the destruction of the school. None of these would be expected if the shooting had taken place as Connecticut state officials claim.

Moreover, I noted that, to obtain that 10/10 rating, the school had to be impeccable inside and out, but that even The Newtown Bee had published an article following the shooting explaining that refurbishing the building would have been problematic at best, because it was loaded with asbestos and other bio-hazards. I asked when that had been determined and whether the parents had been notified and made aware that their children were being taught in a toxic waste dump. I observed that, under these circumstances, no children should have been there at all. I closed by explaining that parents and children had been terrified by the reports of this event and that we were here at Newtown in our efforts to determine the truth about Sandy Hook.

The Jeff Rense Interview


After a long day in Newtown, Wolf and I did an hour’s interview with Jeff Rense, which you can listen to here,
in which we recounted the major events of the day:
(1) United Way of Western Connecticut refused to allow Wolf to inspect its records, even though they are public as a matter of law.  They called the local police to block access to the building.
(2) The Newtown Police Department refused to allow Wolf to meet with its three ranking officers, who were actively involved in the Sandy Hook event.  They were there but “unavailable”.
(3) The Sandy Hook Fire Station was manned by a lone fireman, who became abusive to Wolf when he asked to meet with the Fire Chief, became aggressive and committed an assault and battery.
(4) No questions were allowed to be asked of the members of the School Board, who heard us out in silence and have made no efforts to response to any of the questions that we have raised.
What was most reveling about these encounters is that none of these four organizations acted as you would expect if they had nothing to conceal: United Way should have welcomed Wolf and assisted him in inspecting its records; the Newtown police should have addressed his questions; the Fire Chief should have met with him; and the School Board should have been responsive to our concerns. Instead, each of them displayed the kind of conduct you would expect if they had something to hide.

Brasscheck TV


Our appearance before the Newtown School Board was picked up by Brasscheck TV, which featured it

Calling the Sandy Hook School Board
on its incomprehensible bullshit

Experts raise serious issues

“This issue is not going away”
Experts from various disciplines ask the Sandy Hook school board to release documents they are currently withholding.
When you hear a summary of the anomalies in the story and the kinds of documents that have been withheld you’re going to be scratching your head, even if you firmly believe that the story happened the way it was reported.

The Newtown School Board


Although none of us knew it at the time, the meeting of the Newtown School Board are live-streamed to the community and they maintain a public comment board.  When I discovered its existence, I posted links to four of my articles about Sandy Hook, in the hope that those unfamiliar with the issues might consider them further:
Then it occurred to me that I needed to expand on the questions that the School Board needed to address, where we were not allowed to ask (other than rhetorical) questions during our presentations but where they made a form available for the written submissions of questions, implying that they would respond in an appropriate manner and at an appropriate time:
Winfield Abbe’s elaboration

At this point in time, there have been several supportive comments but also an exceptional post by Winfield Abbe, who was a speaker at the recent Academic Freedom Conference:  JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust. Winfield raised many serious questions that I very much doubt the School Board is going to be willing to answer, even though they would largely lay the matter to rest, one way or the other.  Their reticence powerfully suggests that they do not want the truth of Sandy Hook to emerge.
(a) Did any or all members of the Newtown School Board discuss a possible individual or collective response to those raising questions with a lawyer prior to the public meeting? If so, what did the lawyer recommend and why was it necessary to even talk to a lawyer? Do members of the school board feel they have legal liability for their actions or inactions regarding the events in December, 2012 at Sandy Hook School? Did the lawyer recommend all members simply remain silent to any questions even if they have information which might provide enlightened answers? Why is there fear in answering simple questions? Did the lawyer recommend they take the 5th Amendment should questions be posed to school board members in any judicial proceeding? Name the lawyer or lawyers who advised them. Were these lawyers paid by public funds for their legal advice?
(b) Do any members of the Newtown School Board have any information which contradicts or conflicts with the official story line of events at Sandy Hook School in December, 2012? What is that information if it exists? If you fear revealing that information, why do you fear revealing it? Have any of you been intimidated or threatened with reprisals if you revealed such information? If so, when and by whom and in what form?

(c) Do any members of the Newtown School Board have any questions yourselves on the many bizarre events or behaviors of various public officials that day, as for example the strange behavior of the Medical Examiner Carver and others? Do you fear revealing such feelings due to possible reprisals against you or your family by powerful members of government at various levels?

(d) Do members of the Newtown School Board swear under oath, under the penalties of perjury, that any and all statements made by them in answer to questions will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help them God? If not, why not? Does not government expect ordinary citizens to always provide truthful statements to government? Therefore should not citizens and taxpayers expect the same truthful response by government officials to events like this one under discussion?
(e) Why all the secrecy demanded of the wrecking company and its employees which demolished the Sandy Hook School? Were they sworn to secrecy in order to possibly maintain a public lie? Were there conditions of the building which would contradict the official story line of the events that day in December, 2012 at Sandy Hook School? In fact why were not members of the public and press invited to inspect the building prior to demolition, and take all the pictures they might desire, to insure total honesty and openness in the collective public mind rather than encouraging various theories of events because information and facts were carefully covered up and hidden from public view? Again, why all the secrecy? What did you have to hide? What facts are you hiding? Secrecy is the enemy of the truth. What did you or your lawyers fear might result if the members of the wrecking company were not sworn to secrecy? What would they possibly see inside those buildings which would be so risky or dangerous to be exposed to the public eye? Was not all the blood cleaned up by then? Were not all the expended bullet shells removed by then? Had not all the body fluids been cleaned up? Etc,etc., etc., You would not be engaged in a fraudulent cover up of a crime scene would you?

(f) Will you provide all relevant detailed utility bills for Sandy Hook School, monthly from 2006 through 2012, including but not limited to water, gas, electricity, coal or oil if used for heating or air conditioning, etc.? Will you provide all monthly bills for all operations like food services, books and stationary services, telephone and internet services, janitorial services, and any other and all such relevant services in the daily operation of Sandy Hook School over this period of time?

Silence means you aren’t worth a reply

A woman by the name of Sharon Hill has published a blog, “Sometimes silence means you aren’t worth a reply”, in which she maintains that it was offensive that we came to Newtown to confront the School Board about Sandy Hook. She even writes,
But this is a nice example of begging the question by assuming the answer to the issue in dispute. There is no indication that she understands the evidence nor that she has studied the case at all. So I have submitted a comment, which is under review before posting. I am not going to hold my breath that it is going to appear, but she really needs to think this through:
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight University Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
Bookmark and Share

Related Posts:

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=301340
The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners. Legal Notice

Posted by on May 9 2014, With 3782 Reads, Filed under Of Interest, WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
finca bayano

COMMENTS

To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback


34 Comments for “The Newtown School Board meeting and the meaning of silence”

  1. mpennery
    May 10, 2014 - 4:22 am
    Was all photo and video evidence from Columbine kept secret? Were all reports redacted? Did military experts question the ability of the perps to carry out the attack as was reported? Were there buses, choppers and medical teams there and in action to help the shooting victims? Did the state withhold death certificates and autopsy reports? Etc, etc…
  2. mpennery
    May 10, 2014 - 4:15 am
    Jim, I am really impressed with the school board meeting video and this article. It simply amazes me you and Mr. Halbig are willing to go do battle with brain-dead zombies, who don’t know their asses from holes in the ground and who would sell their country out for any reason. Your comment that the Attorney General was in attendance needs to be expanded upon. Sounds like he was the muscle there to make sure nobody got out of line. I suppose these peoples’ families have been threatened or something. If it was me, I’d get them all together and all come out with the truth at once. Nothing is worth is living a lie like this. I’d like to more about this AG and his background.
  3. Simpleton
    May 9, 2014 - 11:23 pm
    Ok so the incident was fake, sorted. Lets not get side-tracked into grassy knoll digress and detail. THE REAL QUESTION NOW IS, WHO ARE THESE DEVILS CONCEPTUALISING,ORCHESTRATING ALL THESE ACTS (INCL 911?) AND WHERE,PRAY WHERE DO THEY OPERATE FROM – PHYSICAL PREMISES and under WHOSE INSTRUCTIONS?
    • mpennery
      May 10, 2014 - 4:00 am
      No one will answer that. Or can’t. Like you, I’d sure like to know. Then we could DO something in response to these psychological attacks.
  4. LC
    May 9, 2014 - 10:19 pm
    Great work gentlemen with your boots on the ground. Many thanks.
    I just saw some comments from a “Glitschige Arschloch” below -
    Check our what his/her names mean in Deutsche (German) by clicking on the two links below.
    One for each name-
    ********dictionary.reverso.net/german-english/Glitschige
    *********dictionary.reverso.net/german-english/ARschloch
  5. Yehuda_Abraham
    May 9, 2014 - 7:25 pm
    Did anyone else notice that at the end of the video a fellow named “Jim Fitzgerald” claimed to have “come to country” and “knows many firefighters” and “loves free speech”, and yet he could not respond to any of the questions, and instead insists that to ask these questions were outside the boundaries of free speech?
    One can only wonder if “Jim Fitzgerald” was actually born in a country that has no free speech, and is instead lobbying in every Western country for laws prohibiting people from exercising free speech.
    One wonders if “Jim Fitzgerald” has a birth name that reads something along the lines of “Moshe Peer”.
  6. peterof lone tree
    May 9, 2014 - 4:58 pm
    “What can be truly called ‘real’? In fact, we live in a world of illusion where nothing we see, hear, or feel is true.”
    “Aliens, Egos & Souls Who Are We in the Big Picture?”
    http //www.wakingtimes.com/2014/05/09/aliens-egos-souls-big-picture/
  7. William St. George
    May 9, 2014 - 4:57 pm
    If Sandy Hook had been a Soviet School in the 1960′s would anyone in the USA be puzzled? Of course not as we expected the Soviet Union to pull tricks and keep everything secret. Because Americans are among the world’s and history’s most gullible people, it still has not occurred to most of them that they are the perfect audience to hoax. With rotten schools including our best universities this sheer credulity is being passed on to younger generations as though it were something to be proud of. What is truly amazing is that a whole community is willing to participate in something so dishonest and potentially harmful to people. What will be the next “mass killing”? How vast a scope can they encompass? They might try for a few hundred.
    read more ...
  8. LC
    May 9, 2014 - 4:47 pm
    RE – “Sometimes silence means you aren’t worth a reply”-
    NOpE.-Niet- It don’t meant that at all folks.
    Silence means they’r taking the 5th & that if they open their holes out with any crap it would result in their criminal implications!!!
    just like Bush Cabal silence in response to this 9/11 question which should have been answered with a simple YES or NO. Either one would have implicated him. So he took the 5th with his silence!!! -
    Bush asked if he knew 9/11 was coming
    *********www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRtsJEVp-p0
  9. Fravashi
    May 9, 2014 - 4:26 pm
    http //www.greenwichtime.com/contact/
    Above is the link that will take you to the contact information for the Greenwich Times, who posted a ridiculous “news item” about the event.
    http //www.greenwichtime.com/local/article/Newtown-school-board-greets-Sandy-Hook-skeptics-5458643.php#photo-6267956
    Please do take the trouble to call the editors and complain, nicely, that their coverage of this event was disrespectful not only to the participants who traveled to address the board, but to the thousands of Americans who are tired of lies, deceit, and silence of the media when confronted with logical and completely legitimate questions about the December 14 Sandy Hook event.
  10. Mile Hi Life
    May 9, 2014 - 4:04 pm
    Jim, Thanks to you and Mr Halbig for doing what no one else seems to have the ‘nads to do. This is extremely frustrating. But I’ll bet my bottom dollar this treasonous coverup will eventually be exposed, and the closer WE get to the truth there will be hoaxers “suicided”, MIA, or (very publicly) murdered in a heinous way as a reminder to the others to keep quiet — or else. 9/11 taught us well.
    NO doubt EVERY single naive person involved in Sandy Hoax is being monitored 24/7 by the SSG. Just reading this very article and post may raise suspicion enough for them to get paid a “visit” by the hoax cover team, or MIB.
    Hope is was worth it. Money comes and goes. Your silence was bought, but so was a lifetime of freedom. One
    read more ...
    • Jim Fetzer
      May 9, 2014 - 4:11 pm
      I should have added at the School Board meeting that, on the day of the shooting, Governor Malloy held a press conference during which he observed that he had been “spoken to” that something like this might happen. Asking myself what he could have meant, it must have been either (a) that there would be a mass shooting in a Connecticut public school or (b) that a drill would be conducted that would be presented as a “real event”. Since he took no steps to warn the school districts of an imminent threat, it has to be (b), not (a). And Eric Holder, Attorney General, visited him less than a month prior to the event and must be the one by whom he had been “spoken to”. It’s not rocket science. Interestingly, Wolf told me today that the Attorney General
      read more ...
  11. jmreeves
    May 9, 2014 - 3:06 pm
    Ahh.. it Takes Me Back,
    The days of Dick “I am not a Crook” Nixon
    When it was noted that “It is the Coverup that Gets You!”
    (they got Capone for tax evasion..
    Any good Junkyard Dog knows You Know you Do Not Belong There!
    That is good enough for the dog, who understands enough.
    A clever crook would make you feel welcome (while sharpening the knife)
    Why the manifest hostility?
    Do they think they can get away with ‘it’ by bluster,
    or were they perhaps unprepared for (obvious) questions.
    The arrogance is what mostly caught my attention.
    Never been there–until they started not answering reasonable questions..
    John
  12. James Mahler
    May 9, 2014 - 12:12 pm
    As an IT engineer I can say that what WayBack Machine does is takes randoms snapshots of pages at random times. If between 2008 and 2012 there was nothing to be recorded is because the URL vanished and the hosting server emptied of its files/content.
    Having said that, the article is very good, thanks Jim for such a broad range of issues that clearly shows the incredible amount of deception regarding this Sandy Hoax affair. What folks witnessed on TV, newspapers and printed media at large was an amazing theatrical display involving thousands of individuals both on the side of the government – local, regional and federal – and common citizens united in a fantastic game of public deception.
    I have to say thou that if the SSG wishes to continue
    read more ...
    • dave mann
      May 9, 2014 - 1:16 pm
      Poor acting indeed. Taxpayers, at a minimum, need to demand better performances for our hard-earned tax dollars !! Must be some nepotism or whatever in contracting those actors. Perhaps the “casting couch” explains it.
  13. John
    May 9, 2014 - 11:44 am
    Nothing to see here, move along….
  14. Glitschige Arschloch
    May 9, 2014 - 11:34 am
    “Instead, each of them displayed the kind of conduct you would expect if they had something to hide.” – Or, if they were confronted by a group of distasteful zeroes asking irrelevant questions based on erroneous conclusions, like the ‘Wayback Machine’ and how it can’t be used to assess computer activity. All the Wayback Machine does is takes a snapshot of the site and stores it for later access. WayBack cannot be used to assess the amount of traffic a particular URL gets. You need to subpoena the network information for the Newtown School Board to see the traffic.
    You say you want to avoid mistakes in your reporting, but then make this mistake repeatedly, even after Stefanie Perry corrected you when you first mentioned the Wayback machine.

    read more ...
    • Jim Fetzer
      May 9, 2014 - 11:51 am
      I am not persuaded that anything is wrong with the use of the Wayback Machine. But suppose for the sake of argument that there were. What would that mean? That in the process of unpacking an elaborate hoax, which appears to involve federal, state and local complicity, that we made a mistake? What if we had? We have raised so many questions that it’s notable that you have fixated on the one you think we have wrong. But what about the rest? You are ignoring the totality of the evidence.
      And if the school had not been closed in 2008, then why was it not ADA compliant in 2012? Why was it being used as a storage facility? Why was it loaded with asbestos and bio-hazards? I am not making this up. Even the local paper, The Newtown Bee, published that
      read more ...
      • Glitschige Arschloch
        May 9, 2014 - 12:18 pm
        There is nothing wrong in using the Wayback Machine, what is wrong is saying you can conclude no computer activity across that school’s network based on it’s results. Simply read what the Wayback Machine does, you will discover it does not cover actual traffic to those domains. There are many reasons as to why the Wayback machine isn’t recording any **updates to the website** (*not IP Traffic*) for that time period. Have you spoken to the webmaster? (Of course you haven’t).
        Your following series of questions can now be ignored because we can’t assume the questions are based on facts or based on similar fictions like the “Wayback Machine”.
        Regarding ‘Special Pleading’ – the vast amount of evidence you are ignoring supporting the ‘official version’
        read more ...
        • joe chuy-medina
          May 9, 2014 - 2:37 pm
          “questions based on facts”? if we know the facts why are questions needed? is it a fact or not that no mass exodus of children even close to 100 were captured on cameras that morning? this in one issue of dozens. how many children were at the school at the time, and how many were “saved” by the mature adults? did I see several men running from the scene and being chased by officers, or not? wasn’t one man in chamo seated in the police car? etc.
          If JF made a mistake on one item that does not absolve any of the other questions.
          my opinion is that there were no answers because the truth is being concealed for some reasons.
          • Glitschige Arschloch
            May 9, 2014 - 3:00 pm
            Have you seen all the pictures taken by all sources from that morning, during the evacuation? Of course you haven’t, probably no one has. So why are you claiming they don’t exist if you’re ignorant of the totality of the pictures? Do you know what the evacuation procedures are? Are adults conducting the evacuations of the children allowed to stop and start taking pictures? Is that a smart move when you’re trying to protect the lives of these kids, to stop and whip out your camera and start taking pictures? This is not an ‘issue’, it’s an irrelevant question. Just because you haven’t seen those pictures doesn’t mean they don’t exist, and even if they don’t it doesn’t mean Adam Lanza didn’t conduct this act. There were reports of a man being chased and caught in the
            read more ...
          • Jim Fetzer
            May 9, 2014 - 7:43 pm
            If the shooting had been as proclaimed–a demented young man came into a school and shot 20 children and six adults–the reports about it would be very straightforward. That this one required such massive redactions tells us that the official story cannot possibly be correct. That much is obvious.
      • jake gittes
        May 9, 2014 - 12:38 pm
        Shill or troll? With a name like Glitschige Arschloch? (per Google translate German for “slippery asshole”)
        I kid you not.
        Excellent questions. Their silence speaks volumes.
        • I Clower
          May 9, 2014 - 3:19 pm
          There’s more than a hint of omniputz in the posts made by “slippery.” The same kind of sophistry, and the same unsupported assertions, supercilious attitude, and “I’m only here for your benefit” approach.
          VT was troll and shill free for a week or two, guess it was too good to last.
          • rico poor
            May 9, 2014 - 7:06 pm
            i, ol’ omniwutevr could be one of any number who will come off the same. truly sorry to say , but those who believe they are chosen all pretty much come off as insufferable arschlochsssss’. can’t be bothered with the rabble for long. trolling is now acceptable to include in resumé.
      • skipgreeb
        May 9, 2014 - 12:52 pm
        I got ‘Slithering Asshole’ on Google–at least he knows what he is and what he’s doing. POS.
      • Glitschige Arschloch
        May 9, 2014 - 1:39 pm
        It’s like talking to a brick wall with you Fetzer. WTF do you mean you’re not ‘persuaded’? The reality is the Wayback Machine is not how you conduct discovery on network traffic across a domain. Have you asked their webmaster? (Of course you haven’t)
        Special Pleading is all you do, you consistently ignore the mountains of evidence before you that SH was exactly what it was portrayed to be. Just look at this subissue of the Wayback Machine; you constantly ignoring the evidence that the system doesn’t provide the information necessary to substaniate the conclusion you’ve come to.
        The remaining questions you ask can now be ignored as well given that they are probably based on faulty premises. And please, do not engage in Ad Hominems. I am as much a ‘shill’
        read more ...
        • Jim Fetzer
          May 9, 2014 - 3:59 pm
          I have a dozen articles about this on Veterans Today, which I infer you have never read. You have disputed one of perhaps 100 arguments I have made, apparently because you are not in a position to defeat the other 99. Take any of those identified in this article (1) what about the Connecticut State Police chopper being there at 9 15, when the first 911 call did not come in until 9 35? Did you miss that one? (2) Why was there no surge of EMTs into the building to rush those children to hospitals where doctors could pronounce them dead or alive? Don’t you know that EMTs can’t do that? (3) Where are the other 606 children that should have been present? We have one dubious photo of perhaps a dozen, but 626 – 20 = 606. Where are they? (4) If they were taken away using
          read more ...
        • David Houston
          May 9, 2014 - 4:14 pm
          Your name has already given you away, troll!! Go away and try to support some other false flag somewhere else!!!
    • AlexAuer
      May 9, 2014 - 1:32 pm
      I don’t think that the bespoken questions are irrelevant. In my opinion all this questions should be able to be answered.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)