Steve Francis, The Sandy Hook Trial in Cultural Marxist Perspective
Steve Francis, Founder, NewsFollowUp.com
I write in support of James Fetzer in light of the ‘absurd’, as he
describes it, $450,000 award to the plaintiff in the Sandy Hook
defamation legal proceedings. It seriously reminds us once again that
our justice system can be used as a weapon against citizens who
challenge the status quo. It also includes information on a recent
protest action I held at the University of Illinois where its
consideration is affected by Jim’s case.
In his Sandy Hook suit, there appear to be plenty of
grounds for an appeal even to a person with very limited legal
expertise. It is very possible that the plaintiff’s legal team was
unconcerned with gross violations of fairness practices, knowing that a
complicit legal system would protect their every move, but that’s
probably a bit overboard and a product of an abject mistrust of the US
government, but not totally far-fetched.
Kevin Barrett’s article (here)
provides valuable insight and analysis on the details of the trials and
James Fetzer’s books provide vast amounts of information on the Sandy
Hook and similar gun-grab psyops. One pertinent section from the article
is as follows:
As I understand it, at no point during the two phases of the trial was Jim Fetzer ever allowed to present to a jury the evidence that led him to believe that Sandy Hook was an Operation Gladio style psy-op (which those who have read Daniel Ganser’s NATO’s Secret Armies know is entirely plausible) and that there was no actual school shooting … How could he present a truth defense without showing the evidence that led him to believe his allegedly libelous statements were in fact truthful?
According to the 7th Amendment of the Constitution: IN SUITS AT COMMON LAW, WHERE THE VALUE IN CONTROVERSY SHALL EXCEED TWENTY DOLLARS, THE RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY SHALL BE PRESERVED…Jim Fetzer was never given the right of trial by jury to determine whether he had or had not committed libel. Instead, an obviously biased judge presided over that crucial first phase of the case, denying Jim’s Constitutionally-guaranteed right to a trial by jury. The same judge prevented Jim from presenting his truth defense, which would have entailed giving Jim full scope to present the evidence that led him to believe his statements were truthful and therefore not libelous.
And with just a cursory search on the subject of
defamation lawsuits and burden of proof, the following guidelines were
found on Google:
In order to win a defamation case, a plaintiff must prove three elements to the court. Prove that the defendant made a defamatory statement about the plaintiff. A defamatory statement is one that damages a plaintiff’s reputation for good character. … Prove that the defendant knew that the defamatory statement was false.
It is well known that defamation lawsuits are exceedingly difficult to be successful (more).
The figure is around 13% according to one study. The burden of proof
has a high bar unless corruption and deceit in the legal system are
involved, which is exactly the case here.
After reading about the case, I immediately cruised my own websites
for content that may be susceptible to similar legal threats. I
reluctantly deleted a couple of pages where the threat of legal action
outweighed the value of the information, not without thinking that this
is a common response happening all over the webosphere for those
familiar with this case.
I have recently engaged in a protest action at the University of
Illinois that may also come under the umbrella of this threat as per
Kevin Barrett’s thoughts, namely that any action that ‘hurts the
feelings’ of a person may be able to be exploited as a libel or slander
lawsuit. Here’s Barrett’s paragraph:
One of the most dangerous repercussions of Pozner-vs.-Fetzer is its potential chilling effect on free speech. The decision awarded more than half a million dollars in “damages” based on the premise that a book presenting an alternative interpretation of a historical event hurt someone’s feelings. There was no tangible connection between the “libelous” statements in the book and any actual damages—loss of income, medical bills, etc. It was all about emotions: “This tearjerking Hollywood-style courtroom spectacle has whipped us into tearful sympathy with Pozner and two minutes of hate for Fetzer. Let’s express our emotions with a damage award.”
My protest on the quad at the University of Illinois on
9/10-9/11 this year involved the display of posters that read “Holocaust
Hoax” and “Israel (Zionists in small print) Nuked the WTC on 9/11”
respectively. The posters could be read from hundreds of feet away and
this occurred when thousands of students were switching classes. Go , here for more details.
My first thought after reading about the Fetzer damage
award was can the whacky consternation of the Jewish students who cry
‘anti-Semitism’ at the protest be turned into a lawsuit. The answer is
probably not because it took place in a designated ‘free speech zone’ at
a major university — but the thought definitely crossed my mind and
possibly the people from Hillel who were also present on the quad…with
their ice cream stand … in response to my presence. The signs do not, in
any way, violate free speech guidelines, but I am much more diligent
about this issue than ever before, because of Jim’s predicament.
The UIUC police were involved in the incident and took
actions to stop the protest when Jewish students (and not me) were
perceived as likely to become violent. At no time did they object to the
content of the protest and were actually very fair and professional.
The controversy surrounding Sandy Hook is, on the
surface, about gun control but can be taken a further step back into the
arguments for and against centralized or decentralized government
bureaucracy systems. This leads to references in the 2020 election to
the Socialist / Capitalist divide or Liberal Leftist / Conservative
Rightist divide…generally… and exemplified by AOC’s endorsement of
Bernie Sanders.
It is well known that the Leftist George Soros’ Open
Society entities (and his $Billions) back the Socialist / Democratic
candidates and his Jewish apologetics and like support is not disputed.
His and Leftist gun control efforts, in general, abound in this sphere.
Leftist / Jewish entities were the progenitors of Political Correctness
and Cultural Marxism which is just a step away from Marxism and
Communism. The term ‘globalist’ is now considered an anti-Semitic snarl
epithet and is easily attached to the tens of millions of people
slaughtered by Jewish-led Communists in the Russian revolution. Gun
owners are well aware of this fact. It is one of the main arguments in
considering the control of assault weapons.
President Trump recently, in a White House meeting with
Pelosi and Schumer said: “there are communists involved [in Syria] and
you guys might like that” … leading to the belief that he is fully aware
of the attempted Communist revolution in America. The Leftist MSM is an
integral part of this gradual cultural/political and treasonous
revolution. See this Anti Defamation League page promoting
gun control in America. Guns are tightly controlled in Israel. Most
Jewish citizens have voted Democratic for decades. The Kibbutz
(collective farm) is a common occurrence in Israel. British Leftist
Fabianist Zionists had a strong hand in the creation of Communism.
(more here). This revolution is real.
The Leftist forces behind this revolution that includes
massive gun control are the same forces behind the verdict in James
Fetzer’s lawsuit setback. They would never allow a result that supported
Jim’s position and would take any action legal or illegal to make sure
this would not happen.
We are, like never before, inundated with fake news and
propaganda that some internalize to the point of being psychologically
compromised. This is just one of the goals of Cultural Marxists and
their MSM interlocutors. Go here and here to
find lists of CNN and other fake news stories. The piling on of
Political Correctness, Cultural Marxism, mass surveillance, gun control
psyops, and contrived terrorism drills is designed by the Deep State to
limit our ability to push back. When we do, as in the Fetzer case,
perils from a corrupt legal system add to the catastrophe.
There is a fog of data on each gun-grab psyop that would
require hundreds if not thousands of hours of research and analysis to
sort out the facts and deliberate disinformation. In the Sandy Hook
case, there’s an ominous twist to the situation. Not only has there been
a constant procession of similar gun control psyops, but the MSM
creatively intertwines them to multiply their effect. In this story,
the author reports that the authorities ‘found’ articles about the
Norwegian Brevik case in Adam Lanza’s bedroom. It makes for good press
but virtually no one has no ability to ascertain whether this is true or
false, but it’s out there for all the world to absorb into the
confusion.
The main problem is that the MSM and Deep State have the
power to control the national conversation. There is eerie and ominous
cooperation between CNN, MSBNC, NYTimes, Washington Post, CIA and
FBI..etc in their assault on Trump and Conservative Christian America…
and James Fetzer. Trust in these institutions is at an all-time low but
their power and influence remain ubiquitous.
No polls are ever allowed to surface on the sampling the
public’s opinion about the official narratives of 9/11 Truth, Holocaust
Hoax, JFK assassination, or gun grab psyops like Sandy Hook…etc. Zogby
actually did have some polls on 9/11 a few years back and ever since
they have been excluded from MSM coverage of polls. There are many other
examples.
The election of Donald Trump proves that major cracks are
forming in the ability of the MSM and Deep State to hold sway over
America. Their blatantly incompetent and failed attempt to frame Trump
with the Steele Dosier and the desperate Ukraine impeachment situation
gives us great hope that things may be turning around. He definitely is
not a puppet of the elite. The Syria troop withdrawal is the latest
dramatic evidence of this. The election in 2020 will be by far the most
important in our lifetimes.
Gun psyops like Sandy Hook have not only failed to get
the expected gun control legislation in Congress but have actually
dramatically increased the number of guns in the hands of the people of
America.
Hopefully, Jim Fetzer’s legal assistance will be able to
take the obvious and corrupt actions of the Deep State to a resolution
with the appeals process. The duplicitous and careless tactics of the
plaintiff’s lawyers and Judge Remington hopefully will prove to be their
undoing.
Please follow and like us:
Fetzering
ReplyDeleteNoun: 1. The act of making an unfounded or unsubstantiated claim.
2. In philosophy, a method of debate or discussion based of the premise of: I think, therefore I am. I think you're wrong. therefore you are.
3. The act of disagreeing by employing rancor, name calling, ad hominem attacks or straw man argument.
Etymology: Fetzering began in earnest in the late 1960's, being implemented by a JFK conspiracy theorist and has since expanded it's use in the 9/11 debate arena.
1. Without evidence your claim is simple fetzering.
2. He should rely on his data instead of fetzering.