Fact Checking “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”, Chapter Two

“Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”
Chapter Two
By “Dr. Eowyn” aka Maria Hsia Chang

“Infowars reporter Dan Bidondi said (5:45 mark), “The school’s been closed down for God knows how long. [Neighbors] can’t understand why there were kids in that building because it was condemned.” pg. 30

Dan Bidondi, a never-was professional wrestler turned “reporter” for Alex Jones, doesn’t bother naming a single one of these supposed “neighbors.” The reality? Interviews with local residents are widely available, and they consistently show zero confusion about the school being open and filled with kids. If the school had truly been closed, as Fetzer claims, wouldn’t at least one person have wondered why children were there?

If Sandy Hook had indeed been condemned, there would be an unmistakable paper trail. Instead, a school facilities survey from August 2011—years after its supposed closure—actually rates the building favorably in nearly every category, with mostly excellent marks across the board:

This document, easily accessible to the public, shows routine maintenance assessments typical of an actively used facility, not a condemned one.

“In 2004, the Newtown Board of Education was told “there were serious problems with the Sandy Hook elementary school roof.” pg. 30

Which is probably why a new roof was installed three years later, in 2007. As reported in a July 13th, 2012 article in the Newtown Bee:

Work on the Sandy Hook School roof began in earnest last week as materials for the $180,000 project were set in position. The project to replace the school’s entire roof won the school board’s nod over a $70,000 offer by Barrett Roofing and Supply Inc to repair leaks in the roof. The town has filed a lawsuit against Barrett for $15,000 in damages after the flat-style roof on the elementary school began leaking. The roof was installed five years ago.

Why would the district spend $180,000 on a new roof in 2007 if they were planning to abandon the building just a year later? No school district would throw that kind of money at a building they were about to shutter. This investment, along with the favorable 2011 facilities survey, shows the district was committed to keeping the school in operation and in good condition.

“Four years later, in 2008, there was yet more bad news: SHES was contaminated with asbestos.” pg. 30

There was no asbestos “contamination” at Sandy Hook Elementary. The school’s 2010-2011 handbook addresses asbestos plainly, stating:

We have a Tools for Schools indoor environmental resource team that works in coordination with district efforts to monitor and improve air quality. Our building is inspected every 6 months as required by § 19a-333-1 through 13 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, “Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools”; to determine any changes in the condition of identified asbestos-containing building materials. Additionally, the school will be reinspected every three years by an accredited inspector following the same basic criteria as stated in the original plan. Sandy Hook School maintains in its Main Office a complete updated copy of the asbestos management plan. It is available during normal business hours for inspection. The designated person for the Asbestos Program is Gino Faiella and can be contacted at 203-426-7615. We remind you that this notification is required by law and should not be construed to indicate the existence of any hazardous conditions in our school buildings.

This standard, regulated presence of asbestos is typical for buildings of its age and doesn’t equate to “contamination.”

“On October 5, 2013, nearly 10 months after the massacre, a city referendum passed by over 90% in support of the demolition and rebuilding of SHES with a generous $49.25 million grant from the State of Connecticut. The reason given for the demolition was ‘asbestos abatement’.” pg. 30

The $49,250,000 grant offered by the state of Connecticut enabled Newtown residents to vote on whether to allocate these funds toward constructing a new elementary school in Sandy Hook, including demolishing the old structure and securing land for a new entrance. Voting “no” would mean forfeiting the grant, and Newtown would need to find alternatives for the entire elementary school population. Unsurprisingly, the referendum passed with 89% support.

The demolition wasn’t due to asbestos abatement; that claim doesn’t hold up, as asbestos can be abated (removed or contained) without tearing down a building. Newtown did, in fact, consider asbestos abatement among its options. The actual reason for demolition was financial: necessary repairs and upgrades to bring the aging building up to code would have imposed unsustainable costs on the town. The referendum’s Q&A confirms that extensive repairs, not asbestos, were the primary issue:

Analysis of the renovate vs. build new by the Advisory Committee showed that costs to renovate this 56 year old building, bring it up to code, eliminate the portables, make it energy efficient, provide necessary safety features, and more, generated a cost almost at the same level of new building construction.

The asbestos abatement was part of a hazardous materials removal plan to ensure safe demolition. Rather than suggesting asbestos was an ongoing issue inside the school, this step was standard procedure before demolition to prevent asbestos fibers from contaminating the surrounding environment:

“Bestech will spend this weekend beginning demolition, working wing-by-wing as asbestos is removed from each section of the school, according to WTNH. First Selectman Pat Llodra told WTNH no materials from the old school building would leave the site.

“It might become part of the base for the new road or the foundation, or you know, the contractors will make the decision how best to use those materials,” she said.

Llodra told Patch abatement, which began earlier this month, is necessary before demolition can begin.

“We have to get rid of the hazardous materials on the site before we can do anything else,” she said.

“Classrooms and hallways were used for storage, jammed with furniture and office supplies.” pg. 32

Starting with the second photo on this page, Maria Hsia Chang (writing as “Dr. Eowyn”) misidentifies it as a hallway being used for “storage.” However, context reveals otherwise: Walkley’s crime scene photos are organized chronologically across 760 pages, and this particular image appears on page 759—very late in the investigative process. Another photo from roughly the same time, almost identical in composition, appears on page 953 (of 970) in Tranquillo’s Back-up Scene Photos #2, also found in the “22 Assorted Files” archive. As with Walkley’s, Tranquillo’s photos are presented in chronological order.

Here’s a clearer, annotated version of Walkley’s photo, which Chang presented without context. This is on page 759 out of 760, near the very end of the investigation’s photographic timeline. As always, you can click to open and view in a larger tab:

In this view, odd-numbered rooms are on the left, and even-numbered rooms are on the right, with room numbers increasing as you move toward the lobby. For clarity, I’ve highlighted the height markers posted on the wall between rooms #3 and #5 and the “Warm up to a good story” display located between rooms #10 and #12 for easy reference.

A blue tarp has been hung between the lobby and hallway, blocking visibility beyond, and red biohazard bags are on the floor between rooms #10 and #12. Several other items visible here appear in earlier photos: white and blue portable storage racks, like the one on the far right, are visible in Walkley’s scene photos (pages 161–162), inside room #10 (Victoria Soto’s 1st-grade classroom). Tranquilo’s backup scene photos #1 (pages 167 and 200) show these same racks and what are likely the same two desk chairs and accompanying computer desk on the left.

For orientation, here’s this view represented on the Sandy Hook floor plan:

Here’s how that hallway appeared on December 14, 2012, shortly after the shooting. This image, from page 88 of Walkley’s scene photos, has been slightly cropped to resemble the view on page 759. Walkley captured this photo from a position further away from the lobby, standing between rooms #4 and #6 (or room #3 and the hallway), while the photo on page 759 was taken closer, roughly between rooms #6 and #8 (or rooms #3 and #5).

The height markers between rooms #3 and #5 are clearly visible here, and I’ve circled one of Adam Lanza’s clips on the floor. A yellow star marks the approximate position from which the page 759 photo was taken. In the distance, Mary Sherlach’s body is faintly visible:

By room #5 on the floor, you can spot SWAT equipment, including a helmet, a LifePak 15 defibrillator/monitor, an EMT’s backpack, and a bag containing MCI (mass-casualty incident) supplies.

Here’s a closer view of this area, sourced from page 70 of Tranquillo’s “Back-up Scene Photos 1.” In this image, I’ve labeled the height markers between rooms #3 and #5, circled the cartridge, and indicated Walkley’s approximate position when taking the photo misrepresented by Chang. This closer angle highlights the exact scene context and position details:

By now, it’s clear that the photo Chang used was taken while rooms were actively being cleared out, with contents temporarily stored in the hallway to allow investigators unimpeded access to each room. Evidence of this clearing process is visible in Walkley’s scene photos (pages 563-574) and Tranquillo’s “Back-up Scene Photos 2” (pages 151-152), which show room #8 almost entirely emptied out. This procedure is further corroborated by the official report in CFS 1200704597, 00118939.pdf, which documents the meticulous clearing of each space to aid in the investigation:

If the investigation photos weren’t enough, here’s a photo from Sandy Hook’s 2011-2012 scrapbook, capturing this very hallway as it appeared on January 23, 2012—long before any forensic activity began. Unsurprisingly, there’s not a box, chair, or bag in sight, offering a clear look at the everyday school environment devoid of any obstruction or makeshift storage:

The evidence is clear: Sandy Hook’s hallways were never used for storage, and the only reason these images appear out of order in Fetzer’s book is because they were intentionally misrepresented by Maria Hsia Chang and James Fetzer. With nine so-called “researchers” (five of them PhDs!) contributing to this work, you’d think such an “error” would have been caught—unless, of course, they wanted it that way.

And now for the “jammed” classroom pictured at the top of that page. Not surprisingly, it follows the same pattern of intentional deception. The room shown is actually classroom #6, used for special education. The photo, lifted from page 249 of Walkley’s scene photos, was deliberately chosen to show the most cluttered area at the back of the room, near the teacher’s desk. In reality, other angles of this room, taken immediately after the one Chang used, show it was far from overcrowded and perfectly suitable for classes. Here’s a composite I’ve created from those follow-up images, found on pages 249-251 of Walkley’s scene photos—photos Chang would have seen but conveniently ignored:

Not quite as “jammed” as described, is it? Unfortunately for Chang, my second composite—created using four photos taken from the other side of the room, just inside the door (pages 244-247 of Walkley’s scene photos)—shows the room looking even less cluttered than the first set. It’s clear that the special education classroom was nothing like the chaotic image Chang tried to present:

As seen in both composites, there is no fire hazard here as Maria Chang claims. The path to the door is clear and unobstructed. Additionally, personal items such as jackets and water bottles are visible in both photos, further indicating an active classroom. In fact, you can even spot coffee brewing to the left in the first composite, and a December 2012 calendar is prominently visible just to the right of center. All of this points to the fact that this was indeed an active classroom and a functioning school.

With that in mind, we are left with three distinct possibilities, listed here in order of likelihood (based on my analysis, of course):

1. Intentional Deception: “Dr. Eowyn”/Maria Hsia Chang and James Fetzer deliberately presented photos out of order and context to fabricate a false narrative in order to sell books.
2. Unintentional Error: Despite having access to the same resources I used to debunk this claim, Maria Chang made a significant mistake that went unnoticed by James Fetzer and his allegedly highly educated team of researchers.
3. A Elaborate Hoax: The Sandy Hook shooting was an elaborate hoax. According to this scenario, the school was abandoned and repurposed as storage for years, then staged to appear as a legitimate crime scene with incriminating mistakes, photos presented in reverse order, and key evidence made available to the public. The scene would have also been meticulously staged with scattered papers, seasonal decorations, and personal items, including water bottles and fresh coffee, to make it look authentic.

“Then there is this photo of a pile of dust underneath an alleged bullet hole in a wall outside Room 1C, which looks suspiciously like the debris from someone drilling a pretend “bullet” hole into the ceramic wall-tile.” pg. 32

I’m genuinely confused about what Chang is implying here: is she suggesting that a bullet striking ceramic tile wouldn’t produce dust, whereas a drill would? I don’t understand how this could only be made with a drill. Are the numerous bullet holes and dings noted in my article on Chapter One also supposed to have been made with a drill? That would be incredibly time-consuming, wouldn’t it? Why not just use a real gun? After all, if the school was abandoned, what’s the harm?

“Although the CNN image on the next page shows a wheelchair symbol painted on a parking space closest to the school’s front door, it is not painted in the now-familiar blue and white colors that have become ubiquitous certainly by 2012…

But aerial images of SHES’s parking lot, including the CNN image, show no blue-and-white signage for designated handicap parking spaces, which would make the school in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the subsequent ADA Amendments Act of 2008 that broadened the meaning of disabilities.” pg. 32

Chang’s source for this claim is… myparkingsign.com. That’s right—myparkingsign.com, a website that sells parking signs. Why would a former professor cite a niche retail website instead of the original ADA standards, which are readily available on the ADA website? Probably because the ADA standards make no mention of paint colors when describing the symbols for accessibility (section 4.30.7) or parking spaces (section 4.6.3). This would also explain why almost none of the handicapped parking spaces at Newtown’s other public schools were painted in such a manner:

Newtown High School, which had its parking lot renovated and repainted in 2010, is the only school in the entire district to feature blue and white handicapped parking spaces as of March 2012, when these satellite photos were taken:

Satellite photos taken before the renovations were completed show that Newtown High School’s handicapped parking spots, like those at Hawley, Reed, and Newtown Middle School, were simply painted white:

Are we expected to believe that only one of Newtown’s eight public schools—including all four elementary schools and both intermediate/middle schools—was non-compliant in 2012 and, therefore, non-operational? What about the former Chalk Hill Middle School, the building that Sandy Hook students are allegedly claimed to have been secretly moved to prior to the shooting? Surely, their parking lot would have blue and white spaces and would be ADA compliant, right?

Ah, nuts.

So, the blue and white paint claim is a total fabrication on the part of Fetzer and Chang. This has been confirmed not only by my own research but also by an ADA trainer and information and outreach specialist from the New England ADA Center, who directly told me via e-mail:

“The ADA Standards for Accessible Design do not specify the color of the lines and markings at accessible parking spaces.”

Again, that is straight from the New England ADA Center.

But what about the signs? The satellite photos above aren’t as helpful in this case, though if I had to guess based on visible shadows (or lack thereof), it doesn’t look like any signs are posted at Head O’Meadow or Reed Intermediate. Fortunately, we don’t have to rely on guesses, as the same New England ADA Center employee mentioned earlier kindly clarified the actual requirements for handicapped parking signage:

“If the parking lot was built or has been paved or restriped since January 26, 1992, accessible parking spaces that comply with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design are required. The ADA Standards for Accessible Design do not specify the color of the lines and markings at accessible parking spaces. White is permitted. The Standards specify a sign on a post that is 60” min. to the bottom of the sign.

If the last work on the parking lot was completed before the ADA went into effect on January 26, 1992, only state law that was in effect at that time would apply. We do not have information on Connecticut requirements for parking lots that far back.”

There is no evidence to suggest that the Sandy Hook School parking lot was paved or restriped since January 1992. However, if you examine satellite photos taken between August 2010 and March 2012, you’ll notice that stripes were added to the fire lane. Does that count as restriping? Not according to our ADA trainer and information specialist, who writes:

“Striping a previously unstriped yet existing fire zone by itself would not be considered restriping a parking lot.”

So there is no evidence to suggest that the parking lot at Sandy Hook Elementary School was not ADA compliant in December 2012—or ever, for that matter. It’s a nonsensical claim to make in the first place, especially since deniers like Fetzer, Chang, and Wolfgang Halbig do not dispute that the school was open and fully operational before 2008. And if signs are required without exception by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (which went into effect in January 1992), then they tacitly acknowledge that the school would have been non-compliant for seventeen years. What’s four more at that point?

Of course, that’s not the case. Even if it were—and the school had been non-compliant—what would that actually mean? Can an elementary school be in violation of the ADA and still remain open? A two-year federal investigation found that 83% of New York City’s elementary schools were in violation of the ADA, yet clearly, they didn’t shut them all down. So, I once again asked the expert what non-compliance actually means in real life:

“An individual could file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice or the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. The agency would review the complaint. In a settlement, the district would agree to fix the identified issues, and there could be a fine. A school would not be closed due to the violation.“

“Arguably, the most compelling evidence that SHES had long been abandoned before the 2012 massacre is the testimony from the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine of the school’s lack of of Internet activity from the beginning of 2008 through all of 2012.” pg. 34

Wow. Old people and the internet, am I right? Maria Hsia Chang attributes this particular nugget of gibberish to either “Jungle Server” or “Jungle Surfer.” I’m not sure which is correct because she somehow manages to write both. How many people supposedly reviewed this masterpiece again?

So what exactly is the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine (or “The Wayback Machine”)? Let’s start with Wikipedia’s definition:

The Wayback Machine is a digital archive of the World Wide Web and other information on the Internet created by the Internet Archive, a nonprofit organization, based in San Francisco, California, United States. The Internet Archive launched the Wayback Machine in October 2001. It was set up by Brewster Kahle and Bruce Gilliat, and is maintained with content from Alexa Internet. The service enables users to see archived versions of web pages across time, which the archive calls a “three dimensional index.”

Since 1996, they have been archiving cached pages of web sites onto their large cluster of Linux nodes. They revisit sites every few weeks or months and archive a new version if the content has changed. Sites can also be captured on the fly by visitors who are offered a link to do so. The intent is to capture and archive content that otherwise would be lost whenever a site is changed or closed down. Their grand vision is to archive the entire Internet.

Hopefully, you caught the important part: The Wayback Machine revisits sites “every few weeks or months.” This concept is reiterated later in the same article:

The frequency of snapshots is variable, so not all tracked web site updates are recorded. Sometimes there are intervals of several weeks or years between snapshots.

And just in case that still isn’t clear enough, the Wayback Machine states this again—right there as a disclaimer on their calendar view page:

Let me make this crystal clear: archived versions of websites, sporadically crawled by the Wayback Machine, are not the same as “Internet activity.” Confusing the two demonstrates a level of technological ignorance best described as “absolutely staggering.” (Although, to be fair, it’s still not quite as ludicrous as the commenter who claimed “all Internet connections” were “severed”—as if someone stormed the school’s networking closets with a pair of gardening shears and just went to town on the cabling.)

“The Wayback Machine is a digital archive of the Internet which uses a special software to crawl and download all publicly accessible World Wide Web pages. It was Jungle Server who first discovered that the Wayback Machine shows an absence of Internet activity from SHES since 2008 — the same year when the school was found to be contaminated with asbestos.” pg. 34

There is absolutely no evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School was any more “contaminated” with asbestos in 2008 than it was in 1956—when the school was built. For context, my own home wasn’t suddenly more “contaminated” with asbestos when I had the original siding replaced a few years ago than it was when it was built in the mid-1950s, back when asbestos was commonly used in construction materials.

Since the book predictably fails to provide a source for this asbestos claim, I had to trace it back to Maria Hsia Chang’s completely wretched blog, Fellowship of the Minds. Chang, in turn, cites a single short paragraph from the Newtown Bee, published on November 7, 2008. While the original URL is no longer live, the article remains accessible via—wait for it—the Wayback Machine. You can view it here.

Here’s what it says:

Hopefully, your reading comprehension isn’t as poor as Maria Chang’s. But in case you’re confused, let me reiterate: in November 2008, asbestos levels in Newtown schools—presumably including Sandy Hook Elementary, although it isn’t named—were deemed safe and posed no threat to students or faculty. In other words, Chang’s own source doesn’t corroborate her claim.

And if Sandy Hook was allegedly “contaminated” enough to be closed (it wasn’t), what about the high school and middle school, which were specifically identified as having “evidence of asbestos”? Were they closed too?

To drive the point home, the Connecticut Department of Education’s 2011 school facilities survey gave Sandy Hook Elementary a perfect 4/4 score (“Not a problem”) for “Asbestos remediation.”

“To verify Jungle Surfer’s claim, I searched for SHES’s website, http://newtown.k12.ct.us/~sh” pg. 34

Here’s where things really go off the rails: Sandy Hook School’s website hasn’t been located at http://newtown.k12.ct.us/~sh since the summer of 2006. That’s when the Newtown public school district’s webmaster changed the addresses for all the district’s school websites, not just Sandy Hook’s. The address would change again in 2011.

If you search the Wayback Machine for any of those outdated URLs, you’ll find similarly sparse—if not more extreme—results:

This isn’t obscure information. The fact that Newtown changed its school website addresses in 2006 is readily available, as I’ll show you in a moment. Yet somehow, the authors of this book missed it (or ignored it), demonstrating once again just how incompetent—or deliberately dishonest—they are. They cannot be trusted to report facts, and their failure is particularly damning in a book that spends so much time vilifying the so-called “mainstream media.”

Even though the Sandy Hook address cited in the book is incorrect, the main website for Newtown’s public schools in 2008 was indeed http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us. Plugging that into the Wayback Machine yields the following results:

The first thing you’ll likely notice is a significant gap in snapshots: apart from a single one in January 2010, there’s nothing between November 2007 and July 2011. I’ll explain why in a moment. But if you look at the last snapshot before the gap (November 20, 2007), you’ll see that the listed address for Sandy Hook Elementary was http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/shs:

This address is confirmed by an edition of The Sandy Hook Connection—the school’s official newsletter—dated January 8, 2009:

When you enter this correct address into the Wayback Machine, the gap narrows significantly, covering only April 2008 to October 2010:

That’s a far cry from the original claim of four full years. And April? Did these geniuses think the school closed with two months left in the academic year?

But even a two-and-a-half-year gap might seem long. So what’s going on? There’s a simple technical explanation, as outlined in the Wayback Machine’s FAQ:

How can I have my site’s pages excluded from the Wayback Machine?

You can exclude your site from display in the Wayback Machine by placing a robots.txt file on your web server that is set to disallow User-Agent: ia_archiver. You can also send an email request for us to review to info@archive.org with the URL (web address) in the text of your message.

What’s a robots.txt file? From Wikipedia:

The robots exclusion standard, also known as the robots exclusion protocol or simply robots.txt, is a standard used by websites to communicate with web crawlers and other web robots. The standard specifies how to inform the web robot about which areas of the website should not be processed or scanned.

And guess what? On June 4, 2008, the Newtown public schools’ webmaster added the following two lines to their domain’s robots.txt file:

What do these lines do?

• "User-agent: *" applies to all web crawlers.
• "Disallow: /" tells the crawlers not to visit or archive any pages on the site.

Once those changes were made, the Wayback Machine—by design—stopped archiving pages for all schools in the Newtown district, not just Sandy Hook. This isn’t speculation. Anyone with a few spare minutes can replicate these steps and confirm these results. Unlike the shameless contributors to this execrable book, I encourage you to do so.

If this is James Fetzer’s “most compelling evidence” that Sandy Hook Elementary closed in 2008 to prepare for an imaginary drill, what does that say about the rest of his claims?

Of course, there are still a few who’ve talked themselves into remaining unconvinced, like self-proclaimed IT professional Ruth Teltru, who writes:

Still very suspicious that it just so happens Sandy Hook Elementary is the only school in CT. that had the internet archive issues.

First, as already explained and demonstrated in this article, this claim is patently false. The robots.txt file was applied at the root level of Newtown’s website, affecting every school in the district, not just Sandy Hook. So, right out of the gate, Ruth’s comment falls flat.

But it gets worse (as it always seems to with these folks). Even if we generously replace “Sandy Hook Elementary” with “Newtown Public School District,” her claim is still demonstrably wrong. Unlike Ruth, I actually checked the Wayback Machine results for every school district in Connecticut before making any claims.

Out of all those districts—and trust me, there were a lot to go through—nineteen had gaps exceeding Newtown’s 30-month span. Three of those districts had gaps of over four years:

Windsor Locks:

Torrington:

New Milford:

Once again, a Sandy Hook denier not only fails miserably in challenging my work but also manages to make another demonstrably false claim in the process.

And Ruth, assuming she’s actually interested in the truth, might be surprised to learn that Connecticut schools are not alone in this apparent “phenomenon.”

According to Sandy Hook denialist cult leader Wolfgang Halbig’s publicly available résumé—which, for the record, often contradicts his own claims—he worked at both Lake Mary High School and Lyman High School in Seminole County, Florida. But here’s a pressing question: how do we know that these schools haven’t been secretly shuttered for years, perhaps as part of an elaborate setup for some future false flag operation?

Let’s start with Lake Mary High School. Its website can be found at http://www.lakemaryhs.scps.k12.fl.us/. Plugging that address into the Wayback Machine returns the following results:

Wait a second—there are not one, but two rather suspicious gaps in “Internet activity” here. The first spans from April 2003 until December 2005—over two and a half years of complete radio silence! The second gap is nearly as dramatic, running from February 2009 to July 2011, save for a lone snapshot in February 2010 (clearly added just to keep us guessing). That’s almost five years of supposed inactivity since 2001.

But what about Lyman High School? Using their website, http://lyman.scps.k12.fl.us/, we see nearly identical results:

Obviously, this can only mean one thing: suspicious activity. And given that Wolfgang Halbig once served as vice principal at both schools, it’s practically guaranteed he’s involved in whatever covert operations might be taking place. We also know Halbig has publicly admitted that the schools he managed were plagued with mold, so it’s entirely plausible they’ve been closed for years, perhaps repurposed as storage facilities for neighboring schools.

So, Wolfgang, when will you come clean and tell us the truth about Lake Mary and Lyman High Schools?

Additional reading: “When The Internet Archive Forgets”

Next: Chapter Three: “Wolfgang Halbig Goes For The Jugular In His FOIA Hearing” by James Fetzer