Late last week, our old pal Jimmy Fetzer made the bizarre decision to resurrect a particularly birdbrained claim first published on Maria Hsia Chang’s reprehensible”Fellowship of the Minds” back in January of last year. This claim, like many before it, originates with professional con man Wolfgang Halbig and posits that Danbury Hospital posted about the Sandy Hook shooting a full forty-eight minutes before the first 911 call had been received by Newtown Police, proving once and for all (for real this time!) that the event never happened and that Danbury Hospital – like literally everyone else on the planet, save for Wolfgang Halbig at this point – was “in on it”. This is, predictably, absolute hooey.

If you choose to not put yourself through the torture of visiting Fetzer’s site (or even the archived version available from The Wayback Machine, which I’ve linked above), you’re not missing a whole lot other than a paragraph or two of Fetzer’s signature claptrap and a very on-brand “screenshot” from Halbig, which appears to be a photo of a computer screen, taken with what I can only assume is a flip phone:

Now if you’ve followed this site for any length of time or if you’ve read my complete debunk of Fetzer’s rancid “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”, then you’re likely very familiar with how these folks operate and as such may already know where this is going. Hell, even if this is your first time here, there’s still a good chance that you’ve figured this one out. Either way, I’m asking that you bear with me here, because it’s been a while since I’ve posted anything and I kinda miss ragging on these clowns.

While I could write plenty about how stupid it is to believe that whoever was in charge of Danbury Hospital’s Facebook account back in December of 2012 not only had advanced knowledge of the Sandy Hook shooting, but was too stupid to wait an hour or so to post about it (not to mention the 200+ comments that not only failed to notice, but knew exactly what the post was about), for the sake of brevity I’ll cut to the chase: the time you see on Facebook posts (as well as comments, etc.) is dependent upon your timezone. If you’re in Kaliningrad Time, as an example, then all posts will be shown in Kaliningrad Time. Etc. Of course this makes total sense; with twenty-four different timezones across the world, think about how confusing things could get otherwise. So as long as you are logged into Facebook while physically located somewhere within the Eastern Standard Timezone (the same timezone as Danbury, CT)and your PC reflects that, then you’ll see that this particular post was actually published at 11:47AM:

11:47AM EST is of course over two hours after the first 911 call was received in connection with the shooting. Halbig (or whoever snapped the photo that was eventually forwarded by him to both Fetzer and Chang) either had his PC set to Pacific Standard Time or – and I believe this is much more likely – simply wasn’t logged into Facebook at all, causing the site to default to PST.

Here’s what that same post looked like after I logged out, maybe only two or three minutes after I captured the previous screenshot. Notice the post now shows 8:47AM, just like Halbig’s “screenshot”:

If you have a Facebook account, or if you’re willing to create one, then feel free to try this for yourself. It’s dead simple, and in doing so you will have done more investigative work and shown more critical thinking skills than Halbig, Fetzer, and Chang (two of which are, as they’re likely to remind you, former college professors) combined.

Here’s a direct link to the post:

We are here to care for any victims and their families in any way they need us. Our hearts and prayers are extended to…

Posted by
Danbury Hospital on Friday, December 14, 2012

Thank you to Michael for bringing Fetzer’s post to my attention as well as Gina, who managed to beat me to the punch.

18 Thoughts on “Did Danbury Hospital Post About The Sandy Hook Shooting 48 Minutes Before The First 911 Call?

  1. Guest on April 30, 2019 at 8:08 pm said:

    Fetzer is deranged. Somebody posted a link to your blog here in criticism of something Fetzer said and here is how the Distinguished Professor of Philosophy responded:

    “The question is, why, after NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) appeared and was made available for free as a pdf, when the contributors PROVE that the school had been closed by 2008 and there were no students there, would anyone–especially someone posting here–continue to believe it was a mass murder? It dumbfounds me to the point that my inference, when confronted by such massive irrationality, that no one can be that stupid, from which it follows that they know better but are posting to the contrary anyway to promote their own agenda. Not a pretty picture. But if there were any murders in Newtown in 2012, they did not occur at Sandy Hook Elementary School on 14 December 2012. I find no fault in the FBI Report, which is based on data provided by each state. In this case, the FBI has it right.”

  2. Funny Fetzer chooses to believe the FBI, when he thinks they help him and his theories

    • Shill Murray on April 30, 2019 at 9:15 pm said:

      Of course. Much like they (and of course I mean “they” as in deniers) love to quote the mainstream media when they make a mistake or they can do so out of context.

  3. Russ on May 2, 2019 at 11:59 pm said:

    I’m not following the Fetzer court case carefully. Do you know if there is any chance he could be facing jail time? I don’t see how he can possibly win on the facts considering just about everything he says about SH turns out to be extremely misleading or an outright lie. He is also representing himself which seems silly considering he has no legal background.

    • Shill Murray on May 3, 2019 at 10:26 am said:

      Yeah, there isn’t as much information available for that case (Pozner vs. Fetzer) as there is for the Connecticut case, which makes it much more difficult to follow. What I do know is that it’s a civil case, defamation, and I have to imagine the worst case scenario for Fetzer is a fine. But I’m not a lawyer, so I’m not entirely sure.

      These chucklefucks sure do like representing themselves. Halbig is doing the same in Connecticut, even though he raised all of that money ostensibly for the purpose of hiring representation. It seems like an absolutely terrible idea to me, so I fully support it.

      • Russ on May 3, 2019 at 2:48 pm said:

        Pretty sad that the worst that can come to this utterly vicious person is a fine. He’ll probably pay the fine and still have plenty of money left over from the $ he’s made off of his lies and hysteria.

  4. Tom on May 5, 2019 at 1:16 pm said:

    Great work. What is the best proof we have that Adam Lanza was the actual shooter that day? Any photos of his body, CCTV or something similar?

    ( I am discussing the case with someone who believes children died but is not yet convinced Lanza did it. )

    Cheers, Tom

    • Shill Murray on May 7, 2019 at 8:22 pm said:

      I guess it ultimately depends on what someone is willing to accept as “proof”. Obviously what was available was good enough for the multitude of law enforcement agencies involved in the case, but conspiracy theorists – who are obviously not privy to everything that law enforcement may be privy to – operate under a very different, much more fluid set of standards. So if your ultimate goal is to convince someone who clearly wants to believe anything other than the official narrative, I wouldn’t recommend such an exercise in futility.

      No, Sandy Hook did not have CCTV or anything like that. If they did, I imagine we would’ve at least seen a still photo of Adam in the lobby or something similar. But their security system consisted of a buzzer with a camera, but no recording capability. That said, off the top of my head, Adam’s car was in the lot, his glove prints were on the car, witnesses described a gunman matching his description (Natalie Hammond believed he was wearing a mask, but she was obviously under extreme duress and it is not uncommon for people in similar situations to misremember), recovered bullets that were found to have been fired from his gun, the victims blood on the Bushmaster, the victims blood on his clothes, his body in room ten, etc. I’d say that there’s plenty of forensic evidence, just not much photographic evidence. Of course no amount of photographic evidence would satiate conspiracy theorists; hell, there are photos of the 9/11 hijackers boarding the planes that flew into the Twin Towers a number of videos showing planes flying into the Twin Towers on 9/11, yet there are folks out there who claim no such planes even existed and the buildings were actually taken down by some sort of death ray. That’s a real thing, by the way.

      As for the graphic photos of the Columbine shooters dead in the library, those photos were actually illegally leaked to the press. They were never “officially” released in any capacity. And given the age of the victims and the sensitivity of the case, I imagine those involved in the Sandy Hook case have taken great pains to make sure that doesn’t happen again. You do get a very underwhelming, very brief glimpse of Adam’s body in at least the crime scene walk-through video, but it’s just his legs and they really only appear for a fraction of a second. I believe CW Wade over at Sandy Hook Facts has a still of this moment up on his site, if you really want to see it.

      To address your followup comment, this comment was “stuck” in moderation. Most comments will go into moderation for any number of reasons, and I don’t regularly monitor the site, so approval can occasionally take some time.

      • Truthseeker on May 10, 2019 at 7:38 am said:

        (sidenote: the are no photos of the hijackers boarding the planes that flew into the towers. There are not even certified passenger lists. Make of it what you will.)

        • Shill Murray on May 11, 2019 at 8:56 pm said:

          That’s fair. I’m not a 9/11 guy (and I don’t plan on being one, so let’s stop here) and I was working from memory. So I stand corrected: there are no photographs of the hijackers that flew into the towers boarding their planes. What I was thinking of is the security footage of the hijackers that flew into the Pentagon going through security at Dulles. The larger point I was trying to make is that no amount of evidence is ever enough for conspiracy theorists.

  5. Truthseeker on May 10, 2019 at 7:36 am said:

    Honest question: why is it that in helicopter footage, we see no kids being evacuated and no kids being treated in the triage area?

    And why do we see Gene Rosen giving interviews, when he was supposedly at home caring for some of the kids?

    Source: https://oilfreefun.blogspot.com/2013/02/sandy-hook-hd-aerial-news-helicopter.html

    Also, did you know Gene Rosen was a FEMA employee? Source: https://jamesfetzer.org/2019/03/sandy-hook-gene-rosen-identified-as-official-fema-employee/

    • Shill Murray on May 11, 2019 at 8:44 pm said:

      Honest question:

      But is it though? You’re posting under the name “Truthseeker”, asking at least one question that I know I’ve already answered, and you’re citing two separate conspiracy sites, one of which is run by James Fetzer, a man whose lies are so numerous and odious that it directly led to the creation of this site. So I have a feeling that no matter what I say, regardless of how much evidence I have to back it up, you’re not going to like it. But I’ll bite because you’re at least conducting yourself like a normal adult, and I do appreciate that.

      why is it that in helicopter footage, we see no kids being evacuated

      I assume you’re talking about the Channel 12 helicopter footage. At least that’s what’s being used in the first blog entry you’ve referenced. If so, that footage was filmed at approximately 10:45-10:55AM. That’s at least a half an hour after the final mention of any student evacuations in the timeline document (00184096.pdf) included in the final report and at least fifteen minutes after the final evacuation captured on any of the dashcams. That’s pretty consistent with the information available in some of the other interviews. For instance, the SWAT team said that after arriving at 10:15, they were told by Lt. Perry that the school had been evacuated. So you didn’t see any kids being evacuated because they had already been evacuated.

      and no kids being treated in the triage area?

      Conspiracy theorists routinely acknowledge the deadliness of the shooting (they always talk about “kill ratio”, call Adam Lanza “Rambo”, etc.) yet openly wonder why there weren’t any injured children being treated in either of the triage areas shown in the helicopter footage. Who would you expect to see there? At 10:45 or ever? Only two surviving child victims, both gravely injured, were removed from the school in order to receive medical attention. At 9:56AM, Officer Chapman physically carried Olivia Engel to an ambulance stationed at the firehouse. And at 10:02AM, a juvenile male was transported to a separate ambulance via Lt Vanghele’s Ford Explorer. Both were rushed to Danbury, where they were pronounced dead. The remaining children were very obviously dead and were triaged inside of the school by paramedics John Reed, Bernie Meehan, and Matthew Cassavechia, who said “four separate patient assessments were made to guarantee no one was resuscitatable”. I think Reed probably explained their work best in his interview:

      “All the victims were given a triage tag, except for the victims in the bathroom. Those tags were put on the thermostat outside the bathroom door. Reed stated they did not want to disturb the crime scene arty more than they already had. Reed stated with each victim that they utilized the cardiac machine on they left the EKG printout from the machine on the triage tag of victim.”

      And why do we see Gene Rosen giving interviews, when he was supposedly at home caring for some of the kids?

      Gene Rosen says that he first encountered the children at around 9:30. This is corroborated by the bus driver who estimates that she encountered them at the end of Gene’s driveway at around 9:40-9:45. Rosen also says that some of the children’s parents started showing up as soon as 10-15 minutes after he called them. The remaining child or children were then walked over to the firehouse (which is literally next door to Gene’s house, so I have to imagine that’s a very quick walk) and then handed off to police. Gene says himself that he went to the firehouse and there’s no indication that the children were at his house for an entire hour, so I don’t see any problem with this timeline whatsoever.

      Also, did you know Gene Rosen was a FEMA employee?

      Come on, man. How many of Fetzer’s lies do I need to debunk before people stop taking the guy even remotely seriously? I’ve already debunked an entire book full of this clown’s nonsense. What more do I need to do? I’m honestly wasting my time at this point.

      Anyway, Gene Rosen has lived in Newtown since at least the early 90s, and there’s nothing that I could find that indicates he has ever lived in Texas. Yet in 2008 he’s there to work for FEMA? Furthermore, that’s not Gene Rosen. Some dingus simply modified the description of the photograph to fit their narrative.That’s not just speculation; much like every other wiki that I know of, Wikimedia Commons not only allows literally anyone to edit just about anything on the site, but it also records the revision history for every editable item. And you can see that when this file was originally uploaded on October 14th, 2009, the file description absolutely did not include anything about Gene Rosen:

      https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:FEMA_-_37563_-_FEMA_representatives_talking_with_children_at_a_Law_Enforcement_celebration_in_Texas.jpg&oldid=30331171

      Description: “Harbinger, TX, August 19, 2008 — FEMA representatives participate in the 25Th National Law Enforcement celebration in Harlinger, Texas. FEMA is working with local and state agencies to bring services to residents affected by Hurricane Dolly. Photo by Patsy Lynch/FEMA”.

      Gene Rosen’s name was added by an anonymous user in January, 2013. It was their sole contribution to the site:

      https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:FEMA_-_37563_-_FEMA_representatives_talking_with_children_at_a_Law_Enforcement_celebration_in_Texas.jpg&diff=89255677&oldid=31072424

      Someone then almost immediately kicked off a manual crawl of the site in its edited state via the Wayback Machine. The site had never been crawled prior to that. Not at all fishy, right? Whoever it was didn’t even do a particularly good job. They just swapped “FEMA representatives” with “Eugene Rosen a FEMA representative” but didn’t even bother to change “participate” to “participates”. Sloppy.

      And while the guy in this photo bears some resemblance to Gene, there are some obvious differences. First and foremost are the ears, which are not a match and are therefore they are not the same person:

      Almost nothing here matches, but the most noticeable difference is the V-shaped crease in the FEMA representative’s (right) earlobe. Gene of course has no such crease.

      Looking beyond the ears (which is unnecessary, but in for a penny, in for a pound), the rep has prominent liver spots on his hand in 2008 while Gene in 2012 does not. Are we to believe that these spots – age spots – disappeared over the years? Is Gene going through some sort of Benjamin Button situation? How else would you explain the fact that this man, alleged to be Gene Rosen in 2008 somehow looks older than the Gene Rosen photographed by the Newtown Bee in 2010 (seen here)?

      The FEMA rep also has a very old tattoo on his left forearm, which I’d estimate is 3-3.5″ above his wrist bone. But in this image of Gene from September of 2018, there’s no visible tattoo. Of course Gene is wearing what appears to be an Apple Watch (largest model is 1.4″ wide) sitting rather low on his wrist, as well as a Fitbit Charge (.84″ wide), but that wouldn’t be enough to cover it.

      • Russ on May 11, 2019 at 9:42 pm said:

        I swear people see Fetzer’s credentials and figure he is a serious researcher. As this site shows, he is a terrible researcher and tells more lies than he does truths about SH.

  6. truthseeker on May 20, 2019 at 9:22 am said:

    My last two comments apparently got censored again. I don’t trust Fetzer, but I don’t trust this site, either. “Debunking” is not the same as truthseeking.

    • Shill Murray on May 20, 2019 at 10:22 am said:

      What are you talking about? I approved and replied to both of them.

    • debunking is proving a lie is a lie , debunking is not an opinion, debunking is seeking the truth with facts ,not speculations or opinions.

      • Well, what are the claims that it’s a hoax? You have a list of things that “don’t add up.”

        That’s not evidence. Look at any real-life incident closely enough and you’re bound to see things that “Don’t add up” or “Don’t make sense.” It doesn’t mean anything. Life is messy that way.

        Can you come up with a plausible scenario where the whole thing could have been faked and give us evidence that supports the claim? Could you tell us how they hired the actors and paid off or threatened pretty much all of south western Connecticut? And how 6 1/2 years later, not one person has come forward and told everything?

        You’re making the claim. The burden is on you.

Please read before commenting.

Comment policy: Comments from previously unapproved guests will remain in moderation until I manually approve them. Honest questions and reasonable comments from all types of folks are allowed and encouraged but will sometimes remain in moderation until I can properly reply to them, which may occasionally take a little while. Contrary to what some of you think, losing your patience during this time and leaving another comment in which you insult me won't do much to speed up that process.

The types of comments that will no longer be approved include the following:

1) Off-topic comments. Articles about The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine are not the place to ask about Hillary's e-mails or pizza shop sex dungeons. Stay on topic.
2) Gish Gallops. Don't know what a Gish Gallop is? Then Google it. And then don't engage in them. They are absolutely infuriating and there is no faster way to have your comment deleted.
3) Yearbook requests. Like I told the fifty other folks asking for them: I don't have them, and even if I did, I wouldn't post them. I'm not about to turn my site into some sort of eBay for weirdos, so stop asking.
4) Requests for photos of dead children. See above. And then seek professional help, because you're fucked up.
5) Asking questions that have already been answered/making claims that have already been debunked. If you want to have a discussion, don't make it paifully obvious that you haven't bothered to read the site by asking a question that I've already spent a significant amount of time answering. I'll allow a little leeway here if you're otherwise well-behaved, but please, read the site. There's a search function and it works fairly well.

Leave a Reply to Bob Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation