UPDATED: 3/21/2013 (2nd round of questions, Uncensored e-mail correspondence between me and the reporter)
Here is the link to the article Salon.com printed, based on my interview with them:
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/sandy_hook_truthers_are_not_giving_up/
Salon.com writer Alex Seitz-Wald had contacted me about the various Sandy Hook theories. He has written the following articles which are critical of SH skeptics:
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/the_worst_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory_yet/
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/your_comprehensive_answer_to_every_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory/
Naturally I thought it might be a trap, but I did the interview anyway...
Here is the link to the article Salon.com printed, based on my interview with them:
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/sandy_hook_truthers_are_not_giving_up/
Salon.com writer Alex Seitz-Wald had contacted me about the various Sandy Hook theories. He has written the following articles which are critical of SH skeptics:
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/the_worst_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory_yet/
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/your_comprehensive_answer_to_every_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory/
Naturally I thought it might be a trap, but I did the interview anyway...
Just tell me a little bit of basic info about yourself (what do you do, where do live, etc.)
My media production studio, X-Ray Ultra, is based in New York City.
How did you get interested in investigating Sandy Hook? What made you interested in it? Why did you start to get suspicious of the official narrative?
I first started to get interested in the alternative Sandy Hook theories when I saw the helicopter footage of police chasing someone into the woods directly in back of the school. The Newtown Bee later reported this person was an armed, off-duty, tactical (SWAT) police officer from another town. Eye witnesses on the scene reported to the media that this person was taken out of the woods, paraded in front of the parents, and placed in the front of a police car. I found it suspicious that the media was not reporting much on this aspect of the Sandy Hook event, and that spurred my own independent investigation.
Have you been suspicious of the official narrative of other events (9/11 etc?)
I am suspicious of both mainstream and alternative media, and I try to make an informed opinion on current events by thinking critically about important issues. Some topics that I’ve been researching recently include the trial of Bradley Manning, and the U.S. drone bombing campaign in the Middle East.
Why have so many people focused on Gene Rosen, as you did?
Gene Rosen has made several contradictory statements to the media, like how many girls and boys he brought into his house. When I visited Sandy Hook, I spoke to several neighbors, eye-witnesses, who say Gene Rosen was driving a black car in front of the fire house around the time of the shooting. This information seems to contradict Gene’s version of events. I think the police should look into this matter further.
Do you think the community of people questioning Sandy Hook is growing/static/shrinking since the incident?
I think many people who have taken an objective look at all the facts concerning Sandy Hook have walked away with valid questions. Questions which deserve to be addressed by mainstream media outlets or law enforcement officials.
I guess Alex saw that I had posted my responses on this site here before sending them to him, and I soon received a response from the reporter on my answers:
I don't mind if you post your answers to my questions on your website, but would appreciate an email response as well. How about a few more, feel free to post answers there too. Do you have any qualms about secretly recording people? It looks like you're safe within Conn's wiretap and eavesdropping laws, did you check before to make sure?
The topic of secretly recording people is a longer conversation that I’d be happy to have with you at a later date, but suffice to say: yes, I did look up Connecticut’s laws on recording conversations and made sure I was in compliance with them.
Do you understand why some families find this kind of work disrespectful of the loved ones they lost? What would you say to the families if you met one on the street?
If I saw one of the victim’s family members on the street: I would tell them that, for the loss of their child, I am truly sorry. If they wanted to speak further on the subject, I’d certainly listen. Some of the victim’s families will naturally want to move on I suppose. For example, Veronique Pozner,asked the doctors not to autopsy her son. She felt his body had suffered too many indignities. However, we know from Dr. Carver’s statements that they apparently went ahead with this procedure anyway. In an investigation, criminal or otherwise, it is sometimes necessary to ask tough questions.
What's your best guess about what happened at Sandy Hook?
There is aerial footage of police chasing a man into the woods and detaining him. The Newtown Bee says he was an armed, off-duty, tactical SWAT police officer. Parents at the school that morning told a local news channel that this strange man was taken out of the woods in handcuffs by the police. He was dressed in dark camouflage, and as they passed by the parents, the man said “I didn’t do it.” The Camo Man was then placed in the front of a police car. There is also a police scanner report from that morning about their search for a maroon van with its back window shot out. This van was fleeing the scene of the crime. This seems to indicate there may have multiple shooters, and certain law enforcement officials could have tried to cover-up these facts. If there were several people who carried out this shooting, they probably had some outside help carrying out this heinous crime.
What's you affiliation with WBAI?
I have worked as a guest, and behind-the-scenes, for several of their shows including John Murdock’s “Occupational Hazards” (I went to the Tampa RNC with him last year) and Ellis Roberts’ “Class War Radio.” I worked as an assistant for Tony Bates, former program director at WBAI and did the GuitArmy “99 Mile March” with him (from Philadelphia to New York City), and I’ve participated in several of their outside events like “Readings from the Civil War” which was hosted by Hugh Hamilton. One of the many theater groups I belong to leases rehearsal space from the station.
We also had a short back-and-forth email exchange about journalistic integrity which you can read below:
Me: Hey Alex, those answers i posted were merely a first draft, but i suppose you're free to use them if you wish, and we'll just keep them as my final answers. I will try to address your other questions tonight as well. It has come to my attention that you've written several articles about Sandy Hook skeptics, not exactly portraying them in the best light, so I would just hope that you be an objective reporter with new this article you're writing. It's obviously a very serious subject. Thanks.
PS - can i ask if this will be an unedited interview, or will you be picking and choosing certain quotes?
Alex:I've never pretended to be an "objective" reporter and neither does Salon pretend to be "objective," whatever that even means, we have a point of view and are very upfront with that. However, I am fair and can promise you I will be to you. I've interviewed plenty of people I disagree with and they've been very happy with the results (for instance Charles Johnson on Sandy Hook, you can see our interview posted on his website). That means that even if we disagree, I will give you a fair hearing and let you express your views and never ever try to misrepresent what you say to me or take things out of context. I try to relate to people human to human, not adversaries in some kind of battle of ideas. I can't post an unedited interview, as this will be a narrative article and comments from other people as well as my own analysis, but you are free to post our entire exchange on your website. If you want to speak on the phone, you're free to record it and post that. I'm trying to understand where you're coming from, even if I never end up agreeing with. Let me know, thanks.
Me: from wikipedia: "Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities. In the context of journalism, objectivity may be understood as synonymous with neutrality." <-- i would have assumed, being a professional journalist, you'd be familiar with the concept. You say you are "fair" so i guess im just a little confused why you think it differs from being objective. I intend on answering your other questions, but i hope you will take what im saying here into consideration. if by a "narrative article" you plan on categorizing my views as "bizarre" or "crazy" as you have done to others in previous articles, i would prefer to not do the interview. but if you can assure me that you will represent my views fairly, and in context, then that is all im asking.
Alex: I can absolutely assure you that I will represent your views fairly and in context. I of course am very familiar with the term objectivity and its use in journalism, but I don't think anyone can ever really be objective by human nature and that the way "objective" journalists try to achieve objectivity is silly and sometimes harmful, but that's an entirely different conversation! Sorry, didn't mean to side track with a discussion of my theories on media. Anyway, yes. Your views will be fairly represented, I assure you. I'll even let you approve the quotes if you really want. And of course you are still free to post entire exchange on you website and call me a liar if I'm not satisfactorily fair.
Me: If you let me approve the quotes that would be really nice of you. Thanks for the assurance that my views will be represented correctly. I hope you can understand my trepidation considering some of the language you've used to describe those who question the official story. and haha i trust that it will not get to the point where we are calling each other names like "liar" or "crazy."
Alex: I don't think I've called anyone "crazy" (in a professional sense, at least, my friends are a different matter), but sounds good.
Me: i was referring specifically to your article "Meet the Sandy Hook Truthers" where you begin with the line "in the crazy world of Sandy Hook conspiracy theories, this one may be the worst yet" -- but be that as it may, ill be in touch later tonight (possibly tomorrow morning depending on when i get home) with the rest of the answers.
--Notice that they printed the article before I could respond to the second round of questions, and Alex also failed to give me approval on the quotes as he promised--
My media production studio, X-Ray Ultra, is based in New York City.
How did you get interested in investigating Sandy Hook? What made you interested in it? Why did you start to get suspicious of the official narrative?
I first started to get interested in the alternative Sandy Hook theories when I saw the helicopter footage of police chasing someone into the woods directly in back of the school. The Newtown Bee later reported this person was an armed, off-duty, tactical (SWAT) police officer from another town. Eye witnesses on the scene reported to the media that this person was taken out of the woods, paraded in front of the parents, and placed in the front of a police car. I found it suspicious that the media was not reporting much on this aspect of the Sandy Hook event, and that spurred my own independent investigation.
Have you been suspicious of the official narrative of other events (9/11 etc?)
I am suspicious of both mainstream and alternative media, and I try to make an informed opinion on current events by thinking critically about important issues. Some topics that I’ve been researching recently include the trial of Bradley Manning, and the U.S. drone bombing campaign in the Middle East.
Why have so many people focused on Gene Rosen, as you did?
Gene Rosen has made several contradictory statements to the media, like how many girls and boys he brought into his house. When I visited Sandy Hook, I spoke to several neighbors, eye-witnesses, who say Gene Rosen was driving a black car in front of the fire house around the time of the shooting. This information seems to contradict Gene’s version of events. I think the police should look into this matter further.
Do you think the community of people questioning Sandy Hook is growing/static/shrinking since the incident?
I think many people who have taken an objective look at all the facts concerning Sandy Hook have walked away with valid questions. Questions which deserve to be addressed by mainstream media outlets or law enforcement officials.
I guess Alex saw that I had posted my responses on this site here before sending them to him, and I soon received a response from the reporter on my answers:
I don't mind if you post your answers to my questions on your website, but would appreciate an email response as well. How about a few more, feel free to post answers there too. Do you have any qualms about secretly recording people? It looks like you're safe within Conn's wiretap and eavesdropping laws, did you check before to make sure?
The topic of secretly recording people is a longer conversation that I’d be happy to have with you at a later date, but suffice to say: yes, I did look up Connecticut’s laws on recording conversations and made sure I was in compliance with them.
Do you understand why some families find this kind of work disrespectful of the loved ones they lost? What would you say to the families if you met one on the street?
If I saw one of the victim’s family members on the street: I would tell them that, for the loss of their child, I am truly sorry. If they wanted to speak further on the subject, I’d certainly listen. Some of the victim’s families will naturally want to move on I suppose. For example, Veronique Pozner,asked the doctors not to autopsy her son. She felt his body had suffered too many indignities. However, we know from Dr. Carver’s statements that they apparently went ahead with this procedure anyway. In an investigation, criminal or otherwise, it is sometimes necessary to ask tough questions.
What's your best guess about what happened at Sandy Hook?
There is aerial footage of police chasing a man into the woods and detaining him. The Newtown Bee says he was an armed, off-duty, tactical SWAT police officer. Parents at the school that morning told a local news channel that this strange man was taken out of the woods in handcuffs by the police. He was dressed in dark camouflage, and as they passed by the parents, the man said “I didn’t do it.” The Camo Man was then placed in the front of a police car. There is also a police scanner report from that morning about their search for a maroon van with its back window shot out. This van was fleeing the scene of the crime. This seems to indicate there may have multiple shooters, and certain law enforcement officials could have tried to cover-up these facts. If there were several people who carried out this shooting, they probably had some outside help carrying out this heinous crime.
What's you affiliation with WBAI?
I have worked as a guest, and behind-the-scenes, for several of their shows including John Murdock’s “Occupational Hazards” (I went to the Tampa RNC with him last year) and Ellis Roberts’ “Class War Radio.” I worked as an assistant for Tony Bates, former program director at WBAI and did the GuitArmy “99 Mile March” with him (from Philadelphia to New York City), and I’ve participated in several of their outside events like “Readings from the Civil War” which was hosted by Hugh Hamilton. One of the many theater groups I belong to leases rehearsal space from the station.
We also had a short back-and-forth email exchange about journalistic integrity which you can read below:
Me: Hey Alex, those answers i posted were merely a first draft, but i suppose you're free to use them if you wish, and we'll just keep them as my final answers. I will try to address your other questions tonight as well. It has come to my attention that you've written several articles about Sandy Hook skeptics, not exactly portraying them in the best light, so I would just hope that you be an objective reporter with new this article you're writing. It's obviously a very serious subject. Thanks.
PS - can i ask if this will be an unedited interview, or will you be picking and choosing certain quotes?
Alex:I've never pretended to be an "objective" reporter and neither does Salon pretend to be "objective," whatever that even means, we have a point of view and are very upfront with that. However, I am fair and can promise you I will be to you. I've interviewed plenty of people I disagree with and they've been very happy with the results (for instance Charles Johnson on Sandy Hook, you can see our interview posted on his website). That means that even if we disagree, I will give you a fair hearing and let you express your views and never ever try to misrepresent what you say to me or take things out of context. I try to relate to people human to human, not adversaries in some kind of battle of ideas. I can't post an unedited interview, as this will be a narrative article and comments from other people as well as my own analysis, but you are free to post our entire exchange on your website. If you want to speak on the phone, you're free to record it and post that. I'm trying to understand where you're coming from, even if I never end up agreeing with. Let me know, thanks.
Me: from wikipedia: "Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities. In the context of journalism, objectivity may be understood as synonymous with neutrality." <-- i would have assumed, being a professional journalist, you'd be familiar with the concept. You say you are "fair" so i guess im just a little confused why you think it differs from being objective. I intend on answering your other questions, but i hope you will take what im saying here into consideration. if by a "narrative article" you plan on categorizing my views as "bizarre" or "crazy" as you have done to others in previous articles, i would prefer to not do the interview. but if you can assure me that you will represent my views fairly, and in context, then that is all im asking.
Alex: I can absolutely assure you that I will represent your views fairly and in context. I of course am very familiar with the term objectivity and its use in journalism, but I don't think anyone can ever really be objective by human nature and that the way "objective" journalists try to achieve objectivity is silly and sometimes harmful, but that's an entirely different conversation! Sorry, didn't mean to side track with a discussion of my theories on media. Anyway, yes. Your views will be fairly represented, I assure you. I'll even let you approve the quotes if you really want. And of course you are still free to post entire exchange on you website and call me a liar if I'm not satisfactorily fair.
Me: If you let me approve the quotes that would be really nice of you. Thanks for the assurance that my views will be represented correctly. I hope you can understand my trepidation considering some of the language you've used to describe those who question the official story. and haha i trust that it will not get to the point where we are calling each other names like "liar" or "crazy."
Alex: I don't think I've called anyone "crazy" (in a professional sense, at least, my friends are a different matter), but sounds good.
Me: i was referring specifically to your article "Meet the Sandy Hook Truthers" where you begin with the line "in the crazy world of Sandy Hook conspiracy theories, this one may be the worst yet" -- but be that as it may, ill be in touch later tonight (possibly tomorrow morning depending on when i get home) with the rest of the answers.
--Notice that they printed the article before I could respond to the second round of questions, and Alex also failed to give me approval on the quotes as he promised--
