[Editor’s note: My dear friend, Dr. Katherine Horton, has made some of the key documents in this case available on her website. But her description of the case is flawed and I have written to ask her to correct it to read as follows:
On 17th June 2019, a Dane County Judge, the Honorable Frank Remington (Branch 8 of the Court), decided that Prof. James Fetzer and Mike Palecek had defamed Leonard Pozner by claiming that the death certificate for his son, Noah Pozner, who has been alleged to have died at the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting on 14th December 2012, which Pozner had posted on a blog, is a fabrication. They did not claim that Leonard Pozner himself forged the death certificate, but were found guilty of defamation in spite of obvious proof that the document is, in fact, a fabrication, which the Defendants believe was wrongly rendered and which was contrary to the reports of two expert document examiners that all four of the death certificates that have surfaced in this case are fake. The outcome of the trial was reported by the Wisconsin State Journal on 18th June 2019.
So while the documents she has posted are correct and accurate and in the public domain, her first-paragraph summary is wrong and stands in need of correction, which I anticipate will occur at her earliest opportunity.]
The Dane County Court has ruled (in our opinion, improperly) deciding the case of “Pozner v. Fetzer” and the international mainstream media has run with a grossly distorted report of the key issue, where the Plaintiff’s Attorney, Jake Zimmerman, claimed that we, Mike Palecek and I, had found the document that was the subject of the lawsuit by an Internet search, when it was publicly posted by the Plaintiff for Kelley Watt.
So I wrote to the Wisconsin State Journal, which, like the rest of the mainstream media worldwide, has been covering this wrongful decision with all of the enthusiasm it ought to have shown when we first published, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control (2015), but which, instead, like amazon.com in banning the book, has refused to inform the public of this elaborate ruse and scam.
Letter to the Wisconsin State Journal (unpublished, of course):
A Sandy Hook Skeptic Replies
NOTE: I realize this is longer than normal, but the case is more important than usual. Let me know if I have to shorten it down.
Editor,As a former Marine Corps officer and Distinguished McKnight Professor Emeritus, I probably don’t fit most preconceptions of a “conspiracy theorist”. The phrase was introduced by the CIA to trivialize efforts to debunk The Warren Report (1964), which claimed JFK was shot by a “lone gunman”. The skeptics were right.
Since my retirement from the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota in 2006, I have been devoting myself to research on politically significant events, including 9/11, Sandy Hook, and the Boston bombing, where the government might have reasons to conceal the truth or even orchestrate the event itself.
Mike Palecek and I were troubled by reports coming from Newtown that day and thought it would be worth investigating on behalf of the American public to sort out truth from fiction. We brought together 13 experts, including 6 current or retired Ph.D. professors, in our book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook (2015; 2nd ed., 2016).
We discovered that the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students there and that it was organized by the Obama administration to promote gun control, as members of the Obama Department of Eduction admitted to Paul Preston, one of our contributors, when he contacted them.
That means any death certificates for decedents from Sandy Hook have to be fabrications. But the Court ruled that I could not introduce any of that evidence but only the authenticity of the death certificate published in the book, which I described as a fabrication. Some of my reasons were wrong, but I was right.
It is uncertified and, in Connecticut, not even parents are allowed to have copies of uncertified death certificates. Mr. Zimmerman introduced copies of certified death certificates he claimed were in the Plaintiff’s possession, but they were not the certificate published in the book, which I had accurately faulted.
You quote him as saying that we relied upon “copies of copies of copies” of the death certificate “that we found somewhere on the internet”, as though the copy we published had not been provided to Kelley Watt by the Plaintiff himself and as though digital technology does not preserve exact reproduction.
I had never seen the certified copy of the death certificate attached to the complaint when I was served on 29 November 2018. And I cannot believe that I now face a possible $1,000,000 liability based upon a death certificate that I had never before seen or commented upon before I was served in this case.
Not only is the death certificate discussed in the book bogus on its face–because it does not have the certification of the Town Registrar on its left-hand side–but the law is being used to punish those who are exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about what happened at Sandy Hook. The public deserves better.
James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.800 Violet LaneOregon, WI 53575
As with so much in life and politics, things are not quite as they seem to be, where this was not a suit about defamation (for which truth is an absolute defend) but about suppressing freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Deep State does not want the American people to grasp the extent to which they have been bamboozled by their own government. I submitted this to the Court, but he admitted that he did not read it.
DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S (SIC)
MOTION TO RECONSIDER, AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
Defendant James Fetzer, pro se and in the first person henceforth, pursuant to Wis. Stat.
804.01(2) and 885.14 respectfully asks this court to reconsider its order issued during the phone
conference of May 16, 2019 compelling production of my emails, and grant a protective order
establishing that the discovery cannot be had, as grounds therefor stating as follows.
With the emergence of the Internet, the role of citizen-journalists has increased and grown even
as the role of professional investigative journalism was waned. Operation Mockingbird, which
was initiated by the CIA in the 1950s, was so successful that William Colby, then its Director,
testified under oath to Congress in 1975 that the agency owned everyone of any significance in
the media. Carl Bernstein followed with an article in Rolling Stone, “The CIA and the Media”
(1977), in which high officials of the agency boasted that their greatest success has been with
TIME/Life, The New York Timesand CBS. And the situation has only grown worse over the
years, where, in my talks, interviews and radio programs, I often cite three panels of 100 execs
from CNN, another 100 from NBC and another 100 from The New York Times, all of whom are
dual US-Israeli citizens. A foreign power has been interfering with our elections, but it has not
been Russia but Israel, as many commentators, including Paul Craig Roberts, have observed.
Investigative journalists undertake research of complex and controversial events, such as the
assassination of JFK, the atrocities of 9/11, the moon landing and (what has now become) many
occurrences where the government may have motives for concealing the truth from the American
people. Because of my background in epistemology, methodology and the philosophy of science,
I have an ability to sort things out more methodically and systematically than most other students
of these events, where I bring together the best experts on different aspects and publish our work,
where my initial research on JFK led to my chairing or co-chairing five national conferences in
Minneapolis 1999, Dallas 2000, Dallas 2001, Duluth 2003 and Santa Barbara 2013, publishing
four edited volumes (the most recent in 2017) and many blogs, lectures, YouTube videos and the
like to disseminate research by the best experts to undertake their study. I lay out my approach
in taking “conspiracy theories” from “theories” in the weak sense of guesses, speculations and
rumors to “theories” in the strong sense of empirically-testable explanatory hypotheses in my
“Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories’: 9/11 and JFK”, which is available on-line by its title.
SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH
Having been dumbfounded by the “collapse” of the Twin Towers on 9/11 (but not imaging I
would ever be in the position to do anything about it), I found myself in a lengthy discussion
thread of experts from diverse disciplines in December 2005, when it occurred to me that an
organization that brought together experts from around the world in collaborative research on
9/11 would be a good idea; and I founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth, inviting the physicist Steve
Jones from BYU to be my co-chair. I created a web site, (now) 911scholars.org,to publish
research, feature videos, sponsor conferences and press releases, of which I was the principal ‘
author and which can be found archived at that site. Scholars was such a success that it took off
like a rocket and had around 800 members in four different categories of membership by late
2006. When Alex Jones organized his “American Scholars Conference” in Los Angeles, June
2006, he invited me to be the keynote speaker. When C-SPAN videotaped the panel discussion
on Sunday, which was moderated by Alex Jones, all four of the panelists were from Scholars.
My first television interview was on “Hannity & Colmes”, where Ollie North was stilling in for
Sean Hannity. I had been informed by the producer that they wanted to learn the results of our
Collaborative research; but in the waiting room before the show, I watched as Alan Colmes said,
“You won’t believe what your students are being taught by their professors”, and I knew it was a
set-up. I knew they didn’t know enough about my courses to have it right and was able to take
control of the show from the beginning. In many ways, it may have been my most important
appearance on television. I would subsequently be interviewed by Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly
and by Donnie Deutsch, all of whom were out to discredit me (with scant success). O’Reilly was
the most difficult to deal with, launching one ad hominemafter another and barely allowing me
to speak. I thought it had been a complete disaster until years later, in New York for 9/11 events,
after I had spoken at Cooper Union in the Great Hall where Abraham Lincoln had presented one
of his celebrated speeches, I attended an Alex Jones event and was honored to be seated with the
first responders, one of whom leaned over to me and said, “It was watching you on O’Reilly that
convinced me 9/11 had been an inside job”, at which I felt it had been worth the effort, after all.
In December 2006, my wife and I were flown to Athens (all expenses paid) to appear on a TV
program hosted by the leading muck-racking journalist in Greece, who had been responsible for
the downfall of corrupt administrations there. They had a panel of 12 other journalists who asked
question while I addressed what had happened (illustrated by sensational video clips his staff
had prepared). I was told going in that only a few would ask questions, to which I replied, “Not
this time!” And, indeed, I was right: All 12 asked questions. The program was extended from 3
to 3.5 hours and broadcast worldwide by satellite. It was met with a sensational response from
the 9/11 research community and was certainly a high-water mark for the 9/11 Truth movement.
I would subsequently organize the first 9/11 conference sponsored by Scholars in Madison in
2007 on “The Science and the Politics of 9/11”. I would be flown to Buenos Aires in 2008 to
present lectures on JFK and 9/11; and then flown back the following year to be the keynote
speaker at an International Symposium on 9/11 Truth and Justice held at The National Library of
the Republic of Argentina. In 2010, I would organize a conference at Friends’ House in London,
“Debunking the War on Terror”; and in 2012, I would organize The Vancouver Hearings held in
June with a dozen speakers on diverse aspects of 9/11. I have edited and published two books on
9/11, The 9/11 Conspiracy: The Scamming of America(2007)—where the conspiracy theory of
the government has proven to be completely indefensible—and (more recently) America Nuked
how it was done and by whom, a tale that illustrates how much truth can be stranger than fiction.
THE DEATH OF JFK
Thus, I had already become deeply involved in collaborative research on the assassination of
would describe as the only exclusively scientific books ever published on the assassination—it
was inevitable that I would continue my investigations, which occurred with the plane crash that
killed Senator Paul Wellstone, his wife and daughter, three aides and two pilots on 22 October
2002, which took place in close proximity to the Evelyth-Virginia Airport, 60 miles north of my
office. I would publish 10 articles about the crash in the local alternative media and subsequently
publish, American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone(2005) with Don
“Four Arrows” Jacobs, a Native American scholar then at Norther Arizona University. Wellstone
was then widely regarded as “The Conscience of the Senate” and his death appears to have been
in retaliation for his opposition to the Bush/Cheney war with Iraq, where Iraq had nothing to do
with 9/11, as even Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged at the time. My research on Wellstone has
been substantiated by witness interviews in “They Killed Wellstone”, from Snowshoe Films.
MOON ROCK BOOKS
A partial list of (what could be called) my conspiracy research appears on my curriculum vitae at
www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzerwhich I classify as “Applied Philosophical Research” (here, Exhibit A).
Having offered courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning for 35 years, I have
felt an obligation to contribute to the public welfare by investigating these events in order for the
American people to have access to the truth about their own history. After Nobody Died at Sandy
Hook: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control (2015) was banned by amazon.com after
selling nearly 500 copies in less than a month, we knew that we had to find a new, reliable venue
for our research and founded Moon Rock Books (moonrockbooks.com). Our list has now grown
from one book to a dozen, including research on the moon landing, the Boston bombing, Orlando
and Dallas, Charlottesville, Parkland and more, with several new volumes yet to be released. We
also have monographs on JFK (by Larry Rivera), European “false flags” (by Nick Kollerstom,
the leading expert on the London 7/7 subway attacks) and on the threat posed to the Deep State
by the emergence of the Internet as the new Gutenberg press (by Preston James). See our covers:
ABUSE OF PROCESS
The case before the Court represents a gross abuse of process, because its underling motivation
has nothing to do with defamation but with the First Amendment, our freedom of speech and
freedom of the press, in the absence of which the United States Constitution is meaningless—a
relic of ages past, in which Americans had the right to speak their minds and to publish opinions
without interference from institutions acting as surrogates of the government. Preston James has
it right when he explains that the Internet has become an enormous threat to the Deep State and a
source of anxiety to those whose interests are adversely affected by those who expose falsehoods
and reveal truths, which has always been the motto of my websites (today, see jamesfetzer.org).
I had published 770 blogs before my earlier website (jamesfetzer.blogspot.com) was taken down,
But not before I had made the transition to a new and more secure site to withstand intervention.
The Plaintiff, who calls himself “Leonard Pozner”, launched a very carefully crafted lawsuit that
alleges defamation the basis of my having described the death certificate he shared with Kelley
Watt a “fabrication”. The true purpose, however, was not to complain about an actual case of
defamation but to punish me, as a student of Sandy Hook, for exposing what happened there as a
FEMA mass casualty exercise involving children, which was presented to the public as a child-
shooting massacre to promote gun control. He has undertaken other lawsuits and efforts of this
kind, where the recent past is littered with the debris of the destruction of the First Amendment
wrought by “Leonard Pozner”, which includes his campaign to have tenured associate professor
James Tracy, who wanted to make sure that the public was not being subjected to an elaborate
scam and theft by deception, fired by Florida Atlantic University; and an ongoing assault upon
Wolfgang Halbig, a retired Florida Stater Trooper, a former US Customs Agent, a past school
principal and a nationally-recognized school-safety expert, who wanted to find out what had
happened there in order to advise other school systems on the steps they should take to make
sure something like that didn’t happen to them. I know them both. They are honorable men.
The Plaintiff has used his “HONR Network”, ostensibly created to protect the parents and the
relatives of children and adults from harassment by skeptics about Sandy Hook, to take down
blogs, videos and web sites that present the outcomes of research. He has boasted of having been
responsible for having removed “tens of thousands” of content items from the Internet, where a
YouTube video or an Internet blog would count as only one item. He has taken down “tens of
thousands”, where, to my astonishment, I even received three strikes against my research since
this case began. What the Court needs to understand is that the Plaintiff has been very open about
his objectives in bringing these lawsuits, even when he has abandoned them when directed by the
Judge to sit for a video deposition, as occurred in his lawsuit against Wolfgang Halbig. Consider:
There are four motives for punishment: toremove a threat; to set an example; retribution; and
rehabilitation.By undertaking these lawsuits, the Plaintiff accomplished his goal of punishing
those who dare to expose corrupt acts of the Deep State—especially in relation to Sandy Hook—
where, in this case, he not only succeeded in having Wolfgang take down sandyhookjustice.com,
where he was publishing the results of his research, but “to show other Hoaxers that they will be
taken to court and it will drag on for a long time”, his true motive in his own words. Mike Adams
(Exhibit B) and Sarah Westall (Exhibit C) are especially perceptive of the threat thereby posed.
The Plaintiff thereby admits that these lawsuits are improper, intended to censor, intimidate and
silence critics with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition—a
practice that is being defined within the context of the law as SLAPP suits impeding free speech:
The Social Media Giants are engaged in even more direct forms of suppression by taking down
YouTubes and blogs that violate their “community standards”, which have now been expanded
to include denials of “well-documented violent events”, no doubt including the death of JFK, the
atrocities of 9/11 and (even) the Sandy Hook school shooting, which they explicitly cite. After
all, the “official narratives” of these events are copiously documented, such as by The Warren
Sandy Hook by Stephen Sedensky III(2013), even though (as the book explains), it fails to
establish a causal nexus connecting the alleged shooter (Adam Lanza) with the weapons he is
supposed to have used and the victims he is alleged to have killed. If there is a more complete
forensic failure in the history of criminology, I would love to see it. His fingerprints were not on
the rifle with which he is said to have shot his mother and none of the 150 slugs reported to have
been gathered from the scene could be connected with the weapon he is supposed to have used.
By any appropriate measure, I have been an active and public investigative journalist at least
since I became seriously engaged in research on the assassination of JFK in 1992. I have done
research on a wide array of events of great importance to the American people, including JFK,
9/11, Wellstone, Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing, Orlando and Dallas, Charlottesville, and
more. I have been published widely and been interviewed both nationally and internationally,
including by NBC, the BBC (twice), Fox News (thrice), Showtime (for “Dark Net”, pitting me
against the Plaintiff on Sandy Hook), but also by RT, Al Jazeera, Sputnik News, Russian State
Television and Press TV (100+ times). In some cases, I received honoraria for my contributions.
Conducting research, doing interviews, creating videos, writing blogs and publishing books are
among the most important efforts of an investigative journalist, of which I am proud to be one.
In this capacity, I have acquired hundreds of sources across a wide range of investigations, not
least of which are those related to Sandy Hook. The Plaintiff wants me to reveal my sources so
he can replenish his efforts to destroy freedom of speech and freedom of the press and have new
targets for harassment and lawsuits. Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning
have set a high bar for defending their sources from punishment. I can do no less. Allowing
access to my sources in this case would be to compound one abuse of process with another.
WHEREFORE, the Court’s order compelling production having been in error for the reasons
adduced, it must be reconsidered and vacated, in the interest of justice.
Dated: 14 June 2019 Signed: /s/ James Fetzer
NOTE: Insofar as my academic website was last updated 31 March 2009, my more recent activities can be ascertained from an Internet search and from my blog (at least to the extent they have not been taken down and deleted by the Deep State).
AMERICAN ASSASSINATION: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone (with Don “Four Arrows” Jacobs) (Brooklyn, NY: Voxpop, 2004), xviii + 188 pp.
ASSASSINATION SCIENCE: Experts Speak Out on the Death of JFK (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 1998), xvi + 464 pp.
MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA: What We Know Now that We Didn’t Know Then (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2000), xii + 468 pp. + 16 pp. Color Insert Section
THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX: Deceit and Deception in the Death of JFK (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2003), xx + 496 pp.
THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY: The Scamming of America (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2007), xxii + 322 pp.
“A Piece of My Mind: Lundberg, JFK and JAMA”, The Third Decade (March 1993), pp. 35-40.
Reprinted in Harrison E. Livingstone, Killing the Truth (New York, NY: Carroll & Graf, 1993), pp. 635-641.
Reprinted in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Assassination Science (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 1998), pp. 27-36.
“JFK’s Assassination: Conspiracy, Forensic Science, and Common Sense”, in Harrison E. Livingstone, Killing the Truth (New York, NY: Carroll & Graf, 1993), pp. 642-648.
Reprinted under the title, “Thinking Critically about JFK’s Assassination”, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Assassination Science (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 1998), pp. 85-92.
“The Zapruder Film and the Language of Proof”, Kennedy Assassination Chronicles 2 (Winter 1996), pp. 40-42.
“The Death of JFK”, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Assassination Science (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 1998), pp. 1-22.
“Assassination Science and the Language of Proof”, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Assassination Science (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 1998), pp. 349-371.
“Artful Deceptions and Other Fallacies: A Page from Posner”, The Fourth Decade (January 1998), pp. 8-12.
“Three Shots in Three Seconds: How the Nation’s Press Misleads the American People”, Kennedy Assassination Chronicles (Spring 1998), pp. 24-29.
“A Reply to Hal Verb”, The Fourth Decade 5 (May 1998), pp. 13-17.
“Where were You when JFK was Shot?”, The Dealey Plaza Echo (United Kingdom, November 1999), pp. 26-29.
“‘Smoking Guns’ in the Death of JFK”, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Murder in Dealey Plaza (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2000), pp. 1-15.
“Jesse Curry’s JFK Assassination File: Could Oswald Have Been Convicted?”, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Murder in Dealey Plaza (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2000), pp. 361-370.
“Preface”, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2003), pp. ix-xx.
“Prologue: Fraud and Fabrication in the Death of JFK”, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2003), pp. 1-28.
“Which Film is ‘The Zapruder Film’?” (with Scott A. Lederer), The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2003), pp. 29-44.
Reprinted in assassinationresearch.com 2/2 (2003).
Distorting the Photographic Record: ‘Death in Dealey Plaza'”, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2003), pp. 427-436.
Reprinted in assassinationresearch.com 2/2 (2003).
“Reasoning about Assassinations: Critical Thinking in Political Contexts”, International Journal of the Humanities, Vol. 3 (2005/2006), pp. 1447-9508.
“Preface: The 9/11 Conspiracy (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2007), pp. ix-xix.
“Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories’: 9/11 and JFK”, The 9/11 Conspiracy (Chicago, IL: Open Court/Catfeet Press, 2007), pp. 43-74.
“Moorman/Zapruder Revisited”, DEALEY PLAZA ECHO 13/1 (2009), pp. 6-33.
“The Lone-Nutter Refutation”, assassinationresearch.com 1/1 (2002)
Reprinted in assassinationscience.com (2004);
“On the Origins of the Assassination of JFK”, assassinationresearch.com 1/1 (2002)
“Mrs. Paine’s Garage: A Work of Deception from Beginning to End”, assassinationresearch.com 1/1 (2002)
Reprinted in The Dealey Plaza Echo 6/2 (2002), pp. 26-32
Reprinted in Kennedy Assassination Chronicles 8/1 (2002)
“Editor’s Preface: Gregory Douglas and Regicide: Both Fascinating and Frustrating”,assassinationresearch.com 1/2 (2002)
“Regicide: Are We Closing in on the Whole Truth about JFK?”, assassinationresearch.com 1/2 (2002)
“Reflections on Madeleine”, Kennedy Assassination Chronicles 8/2 (2002), http://www.jfklancer.com/kSum02.html
“Editor’s Preface: Ira David Wood III: The Assassination Chronology”, assassinationresearch.com2/1 (2003)
“Editor’s Preface: The Zapruder Film: Recent Research and Legal Issues”,assassinationresearch.com 2/2 (2003)
“The NTSB Failed Wellstone” (with John P. Costella), fromthewilderness.com (6 July 2005)
Reprinted in From the Wilderness 8/5 (31 July 2005), pp. 15-22
“Reclaiming History: A Closed Mind Perpetrating a Fraud on the Public”,assassinationresearch.com 5/1 (2007), 11 pp.
Reprinted in Paris Flammonde, Indices of the Assassination of
America, Book 4 (Stroudsburg, PA; Scanuscryption, 2007), pp. 1743-1756
Reprinted in The Dealey Plaza Echo (November 2007), pp. 35-45.
“New Proof of JFK Film Fakery”, OpEdNews, (5 February 2008).
“Another Attempted Reenactment of the Death of JFK”, with David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., OpEdNews (21 November 2008).
“Moorman in the Street”, http://JFKresearch.com/Moorman, (January 2009).
“Tink Rolls the Dice”, http://JFKresearch.com/Moorman2, (March 2009).
“Zapruder JFK Film Impeached by Moorman JFK Polaroid”, OpEdNews, (28 March 2009).
“What Didn’t Happen at the Pentagon”, (11 June 2009).
Reprinted (with edits) as “What Didn’t Happen at the Pentagon”, (25 January 2010).
“False Flag Attacks in Argentina: 1992 and 1994” (with Adrian Salbuchi), (11 June 2009).
“The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco” (with Jim Moor), (11 June 2009).
Reprinted as “JFK Assassination. How ‘Patsies’ Are Framed. The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald” (with Jim Moor), (11 December 2009).
“American Assassination: What Happened to Paul Wellstone? Part I”, (9 December 2009).
“American Assassination? What Happened to Paul Wellstone? Part II”, (11 December 2009).
“American Assassination? What Happened to Paul Wellstone? Part III”, (17 December 2009).
“Conspiracy Theories: A Triple-Header”, (21 December 2009).
“Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?”, in John F. Kennedy: History, Memory, Legacy, edited by John Williams et al. (2010), (19 November 2009).
Reprinted as “Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?”, (19 November 2009).
“Unanswered Questions: Was 9/11 an ‘Inside Job’?”, (7 January 2010).
“Blowing the Whistle on Dartmouth: Hany Farid ‘in the nation’s service'”, (27 January 2010).
“New 9/11 Photos Released”, (10 February 2010).
“Predator Drones: The Immoral Use of Autonomous Machines”, (18 March 2010).
“US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication”, Online Journal, (7 April 2010).
“JFK and RFK: The Plots that Killed Them, The Patsies that Didn’t”, voltairenet.com, (13 June 2010).
“Conspiracies and Conspiracism”, Online Journal, (28 June 2010).
“Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op”, Online Journal, (6 July 2010).
“JFK: The Assassination, the Cover-Up, and Beyond”, a 7-part lecture series. Written and Directed by James H. Fetzer. 4:25:20. (1994)
“The Zapruder Film Symposium”, a 6-part public presentation organized and moderated by James H. Fetzer. Produced by JFK Lancer Productions & Publications. 2 Videotapes. 4:12:00. (1996)
“Dallas Before 22 November 1963”, A Conversation between Madeleine Duncan Brown and James H. Fetzer. Produced by JFK Lancer Productions & Publications. 0:30:00. (1998)
“The Death of JFK”, A Professional Conference held at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 14-16 May 1999, organized and moderated by James H. Fetzer. 14 Videotapes. 15:49:00. (1999)
“The Zapruder Film Symposium”, A Professional Conference held at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, 9-11 May 2003, organized and moderated by James H. Fetzer. Forthcoming.
“The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What’s Controversial, What’s Not”, A Professional Conference held at the Radisson Madison, Madison, WI, 3-5 August 2007, organized and moderated by James H. Fetzer. 2 DVD-9s. 13:14:00. (2007)
Public Issues: http://assassinationscience.com
JFK Research: http://assassinationresearch.com
Scholars for 9/11 Truth: http://911scholars.org
New Blog: http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/
Radio Blog: http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/
NOTE: As Mike Adams, who has been ranked as the second most influential figure on the Internet, has observed, not only have my own videos and blogs been taken down but those of others who interview me have as well. Here’s an article he didafter having had his entire web site taken down for an interview with me in 2015.
“The Most Dangerous Mind in America” interviewed about false flags and extreme censorship
Sunday, May 06, 2018 by: Mike Adams
Tags: Amazon, book bans, Book Burning, Censorship, conspiracies, conspiracy analyst, Dangerous, fake news, fake swat, False flags, hoax, interview, Jim Fetzer, Mandalay Bay shooting, Sandy Hook
(Natural News) When YouTube banned my entire channel two months ago, they were putting strikes on my account for years-old interviews I had conducted with a conspiracy analyst and author named “Jim Fetzer.”
Fetzer, who I’m now calling, “The Most Dangerous Mind in America,” is the author of a book that was literally banned by Amazon.com. Yes, the some e-commerce retailer that gladly sells books promoting Nazi fascism, deadly communism and weird sex indoctrination of children went out of its way to ban a book about Sandy Hook.
His book is entitled, “Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,” and it lays out the case for why Fetzer believes the entire Sandy Hook shooting was a staged false flag event held in an abandoned school that had no real teachers or students at the time of the shooting. (You can download the entire book at this link if you’re curious.) Notably, I disagree with many of Fetzer’s conclusions, but I agree with the right of people like Fetzer to be able to speak.
Fetzer also believes that nobody was actually shot at the Mandalay Bay event in Las Vegas. He says it was all “crowds for hire” and fake blood theatrics. I find that conclusion to be bizarre and inaccurate, but even as much as I disagree with Fetzer’s conclusions, I believe Fetzer has a right to be heard so that others can decide for themselves whether the things he says make sense. I also find it highly suspicious that companies like Amazon would go out of their way to ban Fetzer’s books when so many other obviously false books aren’t banned at all (such as books espousing the Flat Earth theory).
In an age where Pulitzer prizes are handed out to fake news media for publishing blatantly fake stories, I find it highly suspicious that Fetzer is being singled out for “extreme censorship.”
The fact that Fetzer is being banned and censored everywhere shows the authoritarianism of modern society
Even if you think Fetzer’s conclusions are nonsense, the banning of his books is nothing sort of authoritarian. It’s also fairly obvious that if his books were filled with total nonsense, they wouldn’t have to be banned at all because their lack of credibility would be self-evident. Yet the banning of Fetzer’s books and videos has been coordinated, aggressive and merciless.
That’s probably because his book contains a vast array of photographic evidence that many people find convincing enough to at least start questioning the official narrative we’ve all been fed on events like Sandy Hook. Perhaps Fetzer isn’t 100% correct, people might say, but he does raise some very big questions the media has been glossing over. (For example: Why is one of the supposed SWAT team police officers later interviewed as one of the parents of a Sandy Hook shooting victim? And if he’s really a SWAT guy, why was he photographed carrying his sniper rifle by the ammo magazine? No legitimate rifleman would ever carry a rifle that way…)
Here’s a popular video meme that highlights some of the huge, gaping mistakes of this “fake SWAT” actor who was widely publicized by CNN during the Sandy Hook video coverage. No legitimate SWAT member walks around slinging a rifle like this (the guy is obviously an actor):
Here’s another video that fully covers the total fakery of the SWAT team actor, who has since been identified as David Wheeler:
I believe in free speech, and “free speech” includes unpopular speech. So I’ve posted Fetzer’s entire book as a PDF document so that you can read it for yourself. I don’t endorse all the findings in the book, but I do think the public shouldn’t be told what they can and cannot read. Thus, I’m posting this mostly as an act of rebellion against censorship.
Remember, the entire establishment says Fetzer is so dangerous that all his books and videos MUST be censored by everyone, from Amazon to YouTube. Don’t you find that intriguing? What information in his books is so “dangerous” that the public must not even be allowed to see what Fetzer wrote for themselves?
Note that I don’t endorse all the views and opinions of Jim Fetzer found in his videos, books and articles, but I do agree with his right to speak. Do we really live in a society where Amazon.com engages in online book burnings? The answer is, “Yes!”
Now YouTube is banning ANYONE who talks to Fetzer
Fast forwarding to today, YouTube is rapidly banning all accounts of anyone who dares talk to Jim Fetzer. In fact, YouTube is going back in time and finding videos posted years ago that might involve Fetzer, and they are banning all videos that provide Fetzer any sort of voice whatsoever.
That’s why I recently reached out to Fetzer to have a conversation about censorship, false flags and the banning of his books and videos. Here’s our lengthy conversation, which has been slightly edited for length and clarity:
You may find Fetzer’s conclusions to be bizarre, but don’t you have a right to hear him speak and decide for yourself?
I’m listing a few links to more of Fetzer’s videos below. This is not an endorsement of these videos but rather an invitation to explore the “most dangerous mind in America” and see why the establishment thinks he’s so dangerous.
Like I said earlier, if Fetzer’s conclusions were obviously total nonsense, why wouldn’t the establishment simply ignore him and allow his own words to prove how wrong he is? Instead, they ban his books, his videos and his speech, then they tell us, “There’s nothing to see here.” So why ban Fetzer in the first place, then?
To see more of Fetzer’s work, take a look at “The Parkland Puzzle: How the Pieces Fit Together” https://d.tube/#!/v/monaalexis27/lvkflnbp
“Sandy Hook Update: Tracy Loses, Wolfgang Wins. The Deep State Strikes Back”https://www.bitchute.com/video/H8pLy2RiSAgC/
“False Flags on Five Fronts” https://d.tube/#!/v/monaalexis27/v9he2ql5
Sarah Westall, who also has a background as an investigative journalist, has more recently interviewed me and explained why my case is about the First Amendment and not about a purported act of defamation, in interviews she has done with me, where she has been among the best at recognizing the threat to freedom of speech and to freedom of the press, where the mainstream media refuses to cover what the skeptics have to say and only present information supportive of official narratives: