Newtown shooting theory-the government did it.

[displacedinMN]

This was in the St. Paul paper this morning. I don't know how much press it will get.
This will make everyone throw up. This guy must be completely nuts.


Retired UMD professor theorizes that government behind Newtown massacre
By Jana Hollingsworth
Duluth News Tribune
Posted: 01/04/2013 12:01:00 AM CST
Updated: 01/04/2013 06:19:15 PM CST

A retired University of Minnesota-Duluth professor known for his conspiracy theories on John F. Kennedy's assassination, the 9/11 attacks and the Paul Wellstone plane crash has found himself in the news again -- this time for claiming the U.S. government was involved in the Newtown, Conn., school shootings.

In his online writings, James Fetzer cites chief among his credentials his ties to UMD, a fact lamented by at least one professor at another university.

Fetzer, also an author and former Marine Corps officer, claims in an online journal that Israeli Mossad death squads and the U.S. government might have been behind the school shootings in Connecticut. At the end of his piece, Fetzer describes himself as an emeritus professor at UMD, and he uses his UMD e-mail address as his contact.

UMD officials say Fetzer has the right to express his views -- but he also has the responsibility to make clear he's not speaking for the university.

Other retired UMD faculty members have been identified as emeriti when writing opinion pieces in the pages of the News Tribune, including physician Robert Goldish and American Indian studies professor Robert Powless.

Fetzer's Newtown conspiracy theory earned him a mention by writer Michael Moynihan in the online magazine "Daily Beast," an article titled: "Newtown Conspiracy Theories: Obama, Iran, and Other Culprits." Beneath that, a secondary headline reads: "The government was behind the school massacre. Wait, it was Obama,
in a ruse to take our guns away. No, it was Iran! Israel! Batman! Michael Moynihan on the paranoid wing's 'real truth' about Sandy Hook."

Fetzer writes in his online column, published on "Press TV and "Veterans Today": "The Sandy Hook massacre appears to have been a psy op intended to strike fear in the hearts of Americans by the sheer brutality of the massacre, where the killing of children is a signature of terror ops conducted by agents of Israel."

The act, Fetzer said in an interview with the News Tribune, "is part of an escalating series of covert operations intended to create hysteria in the American people in order to support gun control legislation that completely subverts the Second Amendment."

Fetzer lists his UMD e-mail address as the way for readers to contact him, which was granted to him as part of his retirement package. He says he doesn't speak for UMD and that UMD hasn't suggested he refrain from connecting himself to the university.

"There is something called freedom of research, freedom of inquiry," he said, "which the University of Minnesota has respected. I can't imagine why any university would want to discourage its faculty from exercising their independent thought and critical reasoning ability."

Faculty, including faculty emeriti, are protected by the Regents Policy on Academic Freedom and Responsibility, according to Andrea Schokker, executive vice chancellor of academic affairs at UMD. The policy protects the freedom of creative expression and to speak or write on matters of public interest without institutional discipline or restraint. That comes with the responsibility to make it clear that one isn't speaking for the institution, she said.

But to the average person who reads the Fetzer piece, it appears Fetzer represents UMD, said Donna Halper, an associate professor of communication at Lesley University in Cambridge, Mass. Fetzer identifies himself as a UMD professor emeritus and notes his faculty page on UMD's website.

"For a professor to be spreading stereotypes under the guise of academic freedom is profoundly disappointing," said Halper, whose earlier career in radio led her to Duluth several times. She found Duluth to be tolerant and compassionate, she said, and she was surprised to read Fetzer's work, which she classified as a "fringe view."

"I'm not saying he doesn't have the right to speak, but ... when it comes from a professor, it makes me wonder: What did he teach his students?" asked Halper, who teaches courses on philosophy and communication ethics. "Here you have someone who is allegedly an educated person spreading such uneducated opinions in the name of Duluth. That's outrageous."

Fetzer, of Oregon, Wis., and a professor of philosophy, spent 35 years teaching at universities, 19 of those years at UMD. He was awarded a McKnight Professorship from the University of Minnesota in 1996, which included a $100,000 research grant. He retired from UMD in 2006.

He has an Internet radio show, has written more than two dozen books and has become a well-known voice among those who claim that Kennedy was assassinated by his own government. He also theorizes that the U.S. government was involved in the Wellstone plane crash and the 9/11 attacks.

As a philosopher, Fetzer said, he cares about the truth, and his scientific research has revealed that "the government lies to us."

[BucEyedPea]

Nope. Your post 293 didn't refute any points but implied I had a break with reality.
My pov was that they wanted to eradicate gun rights which would be under the banner of gun control. Even Hillary thought it was odious earlier. It's a fact that there is a planned discussion in NY for more gun regs.

There is no doubt in my mind that people like Obama, and other leftists would love to strangle us with more gun regs to defang our rights gradually to the point of disarmament.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Nope. Your post 293 didn't refute any points but implied I had a break with reality.
My pov was that they wanted to eradicate gun rights which would be under the banner of gun control. Even Hillary thought it was odious earlier. It's a fact that there is a planned discussion in NY for more gun regs.

There is no doubt in my mind that people like Obama, and other leftists would love to strangle us with more gun regs to defang our rights gradually to the point of disarmament.

I am challenging your statement. I say the proposed treaty has nothing in it that impacts your personal guns rights under the 2nd amendment. Point out in the treaty why I am wrong and why you think it would "eradicate private gun ownership."

[BucEyedPea]

Did you say something?

Nah! It was just some noise.

[teedubya]

The whole story isn't being told, regardless... plus, the story keeps changing. I'm still undecided on this event.

Here's an article from the Newtown Bee Newspaper...

http://newtownbee.com/News/2012-12-2...ma%20Treatment

The interesting tip in this story... is in the last sentence.

A man with a gun who was spotted in the woods near the school on the day of the incident was an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town, according to the source.

This is the same guy that the helicopter footage from that CT news station video taped getting arrested, but not mentioned about in the media.

Turn down your volume on this thing before watching...

[Fish]

Originally Posted by DJJasonp

I'm not saying Newtown is or isnt something......so let's get that clear straight away.

But I've come to the realization that people either have an open mind - or they dont. It's that simple.

It's wasted keystrokes and breaths to try to convince a closed mind of the POSSIBILITY of something outside of what Hannity or Maddow tells them to think.

The sad thing is, the same people, in many cases, who are so absolutely 100% positive that what they "know" is right - and everyone else thinking otherwise are loons....are the same people who have yet to read a book, watch a documentary, or read the 9/11 commission report.

In many cases, it's a fundamental issue.

If people think, without a doubt, that government and world leaders (banking, pharma, agri, etc...) have YOUR best interests at the heart of their operations.........and they're to be trusted.

Well....there's no more conversation to have.

I tend to believe that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And money corrupts.

With those in play - anything is possible.

Most people acknowledge the possibility, and simply understand it to be so infinitesimally small that it isn't worthy of further consideration. I've read a great deal about the subject, and have watched plenty of videos and documentaries, and I still remain completely unconvinced. I know full well that the government and its leaders don't have my best interests at heart. They're evil ****ing scumbags, the lot of them. But they still don't have the resources or ability to do this, and doing so wouldn't give them sufficient benefits to justify it. Anything is possible for sure. But you have to acknowledge when the possibility gets so low as to approach zero, you can pretty confidently say "Nah"....