attacks Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner

Mr. Alex Seitz-Wald of attacks Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner

by Jon Rappoport

January 23, 2013

Alex Seitz-Wald has written a hit piece at, attacking Jeff Rense, the owner of and long-time radio host, and Jay Weidner, who has decades of experience as a radio host and documentary producer, including extensive research into the films of Stanley Kubrick.

Seitz-Wald’s Salon article, “Your comprehensive answer to every Sandy Hook conspiracy,” slams a radio conversation between Rense and Weidner.

Among dozens of holes in the official account of the Sandy Hook murders, we have massively disturbing interviews with parents of the dead children and key members of the Newtown community.

These boggling interviews were the subject of the radio conversation Rense had with Weidner. Apparently, it really got under Seitz-Wald’s skin, because he had to feature it in his hit piece.

In particular, he went after this comment Jay Weider made: “They [the Sandy Hook residents interviewed on television] aren’t behaving the way human beings would act.”

Seitz-Wald writes:

Why aren’t the [Sandy Hook] adults sadder [in their television interviews]? They aren’t behaving the way human beings would act,’ as conspiracy theorist Jay Weidner told fellow conspiracy theorist Jeff Rense on his radio show. Theorists have zeroed in on Robbie Parker, who they say wasn’t grieving hard enough for his slain 6-year-old daughter, Emilie. In one widely circulated clip, Parker laughs before stepping up to the microphone, and apparently someone says ‘read from the card (as in cue card) before Parker breathes heavily in anticipation of beginning a press conference. ‘This is what actors do to get into character,’ one popular YouTube video states.”

Let’s take this statement apart. It’s easy. Seitz-Wald actually makes Rense’s and Weidner’s case for them by pointing to Parker. Because Robbie Parker, as anyone can see, chuckles, smiles, and acts quite relaxed and chummy just before he takes to the podium to deliver his words of grief.

It’s so stunning you have to look at the clip several times to believe your own eyes. And worse, you then watch Parker huff and puff and try to, yes, put himself into character so he can appear suitably devastated.

Does this mean he’s a hired actor? Neither Rense nor Weidner drew that conclusion, but Setiz-Wald casually allows his readers to think so.

In fact, Rense and Weidner were talking about something else, something very important: the “missing pieces” in the psyches of people who are interviewed on television, in the wake of personal horrors, people who simply don’t behave as human beings would, who show no exploding grief, no collapse, no sign of profound shock or loss.

At Salon, Seitz-Wald tries to solve this “puzzle” by referring to a study that claims the alternation between “sadness and mirth” occurs often in people who have undergone a tragedy.

This is patently absurd. The irrelevant study wasn’t tightly focused on a devastating massacre of very young children. It didn’t take into account the omnivorous presence of television and its influence.

Seitz-Wald continues: “Rense and Weidner also take issue with the mourning of the school nurse, the family of slain teacher Victoria Soto, and others.”

Yes, absolutely, and why not? The behavior of these people, as they were interviewed on television, was profoundly lacking in the kind of grief we would expect.

And Seitz-Wald calls Rense and Weidner conspiracy theorists? It’s he who doesn’t have eyes to see. If he did, and actually watched these bizarre interviews, he too would be disturbed. But instead, he’s ready to cast “conspiracy theorists” as people who believe nothing happened at Sandy Hook and no one died.

That’s one of his missions in the article, and he’s willing to grossly misrepresent Rense and Weidner to achieve the objective.

His tactic is classic. Attack the people whose ideas you want to neutralize, don’t carefully examine and report what they’re saying, and along the way attribute to them ideas they never had.

Seitz-Wald mentions another now-famous Sandy Hook resident, Gene Rosen, who was interviewed several times about the help he gave to a group of children who had fled the school.

Seitz-Wald fails to point out what Jay Weidner was saying about Rosen—that he too showed no sign of real shock or grief, certainly not at the level one would expect after 20 children had been murdered a few blocks away.

Instead, Seitz-Wald focuses on criticisms made of Rosen’s account of the timeline, during which he brought children into his house and then called their parents.

Again, Weidner and Rense were talking about something else, something far more important: WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO PEOPLE IN OUR SOCIETY, SUCH THAT THEY CAN’T FIND HUMAN FEELINGS IN THEMSELVES WHEN HORRIFIC TRAGEDY STRIKES?

You want conspiracy? Here it is. People who make their living in media see no problem in the failure to be human. They set up, prepare for, and construct interviews in which people, routinely, do not act human. That is conspiracy-plus. It is an ongoing and concerted effort to hold up a mirror to millions of viewers—and the reflection says: ACT LIKE AN ANDROID BECAUSE WE LIVE IN AN ANDROID WORLD.

That is television’s day-to-day message: forget what it means to be human.

Weidner and Rense were carrying on a mature and vital conversation about the loss of humanity in modern society. For that, they were taken to task. How preposterous.

I’ll go out on a limb, after reading Seitz-Wald’s bio, and assume he’s on the side of gun control. He “interned at the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer at PBS.” He “co-founded and edited the Olive and Arrow, a blog on foreign affairs for and by young progressives.”

Does he want to avoid any break in the smooth advance from Sandy Hook to new gun laws? Does he want to derail the possibility that a real investigation of what happened at Sandy Hook would take the focus away from the guns?

I don’t know what his personal motive was for writing his Salon piece, but it surely missed the mark by a mile.

If Seitz-Wald wants to undertake something important, rather than deliver his brush-off, frivolous, and underhanded attack, he should invite Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner to a real conversation.

Let the three of them sit on camera for a couple of hours and put up the clips of television interviews with Gene Rosen, Robbie Parker, the Soto family, H Wayne Carver, Sally Cox, Kaitlin Roig, and other Sandy Hook residents.

Let’s hear a conversation about these stunning documents for our time. Stunning because they show that human beings can talk to television reporters about a profound and horrific personal tragedy without vaguely approaching what it means to be human.

That’s what Rense and Weidner were delving into on the radio, and that exploration is far from over. It makes what Seitz-Wald wrote shamelessly puerile.

Major media not only exploit victims of grief for the sake of a narrative, they tap into victims at a shocking level where there is no authentic feeling at all, and they show the audience that vacuum as a representation of reality.

If this were merely a trick, it wouldn’t be so significant. But as the television interviews with the people of Sandy Hook reveal, the interviewees are all too eager to play along. They have lost their compass completely. They have become robots by choice.

The day when a serious conversation about this is unimportant is the day when we are all underwater for good. Rense and Weidner were exploring this subject, as genuine investigators of the human condition should.

You want to talk about something real, Mr. Seitz-Wald? Start there. Buckle up, because you’re in for a bumpy ride.

Was your attack on Rense and Weidner just an offhand, tiresome, and predictable hit piece lumping together “conspiracy theorists,” because it was a slow day and you wanted to file something at Salon?

You really need to pay more attention to what the people you’re attacking are saying. It helps. I’ve found it really helps. You start by listening to their words and the intent of those words. That way you can glean the actual subject they’re covering, not some other subject.

From there, you think about what they’re exploring. You do a little thinking. Sometimes it’s hard and it throws you off your pre-formed opinion and headline, but you do it anyway. It’s part of the job.

Then (I’m really trying to help here), you decide what you think of what they think. You do it honestly. And then you gather yourself and you write. You write something that might turn out to be important.

That’s what you want. Something important, rather than something cheap that sheds paint flakes the first time you pick it up and shake it. In the long run, this will serve you. You’ll develop a habit and perhaps even a taste for going after what’s important.

In closing, I’d like to refer to another article of yours, “The Hitler gun control lie.” You made the point that Jews having guns in Germany wouldn’t have protected them from the death camps. The Nazi soldiers would have overwhelmed the Jews anyway.

I was struck by that point. I asked myself, and I ask you, if you were a Jew in Nazi Germany, how would you have wanted to die? I believe it’s a legitimate question, one that the scholars you cited rarely if ever consider.

Would you have chosen to move numbly with your family to a boxcar on a track, on your way to a camp, or would you rather have stood in your living room, in front of your wife and children, shooting bullets at your attackers?

I ask this because, again, it has to do with the definition of being human in this world. It has to do with possessing the means and the will and the desire to choose how to live and die.

Just as you ignored the very same subject in the radio conversation between Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner, I believe you ignored it in your article about Hitler, Jews, and guns.

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and a CD to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

What is the world you hope will come to pass, Mr. Seitz-Wald? I’m not asking for the flip superficial answer here, but the real one, the one that hopefully beats in your heart and mind and spirit. What are you hoping and aiming for?

People like Rense and Weidner and me, and many others who are sometimes characterized as conspiracy theorists, consider this question every day.

In case you interested, that’s where we’re coming from. This isn’t a little foolish social game we’re playing. We’ve shoved in all our chips. We look at you and we don’t see that. We see something else.

If we’re wrong, prove it. Let’s see your hole cards, because it’s rather late in the evening, and this is the main hand, and it’s time for the Reveal.

You came into our house, and it appears you were riding on a goof, but this isn’t it. This is something entirely different.

If you’re out, walk away. If you’re in, lay down all your cards. Let’s see what you’ve really got.

Your brand has no cache here. What kind of human are you?

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at

28 comments on “ attacks Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner

  1. Sean says:

    Perhaps you could have an online poll for what your readers think happened at Sandy Hook?

    I lean toward the it didn’t happen story. It’s the easiest thing to stage. It is the easiest to cover up. It has the least “loose ends.”

    I’m not saying that Americans aren’t empty robots, because most of them are. In fact, I wish I could be as emotionless as my fellow citizens. It seems like a wonderful way to go through life- feel nothing.

  2. Hermies says:

    These media goons (Anderson Cooper and Bill Maher are two others) are paid big bucks to demonize the free-thinking individual and his concerns about the real nature of the world we live in. “Conspiracy Theorist” is a catch-all for anybody questioning the Moloch-written establishment line, and most dumb saps fall for it, because you don’t want to be thought of as a “conspiracy theorist” – in mainstream culture, that is a supposed badge of shame. Funny how easily most dumb fools buy the official story, but then again, they are dumb fools…

  3. bigtim says:

    One actor left out is Obama and his phony 12/14 speech. He read from a script on the podium with no tightness or emotion at all in his voice, There was not a hint of a tear or any wetness in his eye and he casually flicked at his eyes as if he was removing a piece of lint or dirt. He must have known something about Sandy Hook we didn’t. The pandering, sickening promotion of this phony speech by ABC was disturbing.

  4. Ter ber says:

    Well the good news is that maybe the few that read will go to . Because they lack getting all the news from Salon. Once you know the Plan. It’s impossible to go and put your head back into the ground. Thanks for the article Mr. Rappoport.

  5. zeno says:

    well look at this way: where there’s smoke, there’s fire 🙂

    imagined if this type of questioning happened right after 9/11?

    you’re doing amazing work Jon.

  6. T says:

    Haha, Seitz-Wald a wanna be, dime a dozen, social ho could never hold a candle to Rense…his coats turn so fast; his spin actually catches folk off guard enough to pay him nevermind…reminds me of that freak Peirs Morgan. Anyhow, there is no one in Rense’s league ‘and I pretty much have seen and heard em all’…

  7. Franco says:

    Hard to believe it is true , cose usualy at mass shootings are more Wounded than deaths , but here not one single injury can be seen , no ambulances around no people/students running for saftey nothing to shaw something did hapen there , not to mention changeing story of gun what type of guns used , parents laughing beighn interviewd , to many things sre so wrong with this bullcit story , , since when Gov and police provide a minder for every family , OH Boy so much foul smell around this jod .

  8. Mari says:

    You are doing amazing work John. Thank you. I feel less alone in the world. You articulate perfectly what tumbles around in my psyche all day long. I am so damn sick of of being told I am a conspiracist for simply asking questions and pointing out obvious oddities or flaws in the narrative of the day.

  9. Tc says:

    Love it Jon! So bang on brilliant!

  10. TheBeav says:

    Well, I’ve never used this term before, but here I think it applies: You sir, I think PWNED Mr. Seitz-Wald in a very special way, and I thank you for that!

  11. Don't Trust The Lamestream Media says:

    If something gets the lamestream media rattled you can bet they’re trying to hide something.

  12. Don't Trust The Lamestream Media says:

    I would also like to add, if there were no kernel of truth behind what Jeff
    Rense and Jay Weidner had to say, the lamestream media would not be spitting venom and going on the attack so fiercely.

  13. Al says:

    Interesting take on why things are somewhat obviously not right with the whole SH affair from Max Igan


    “If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours. He will put some things behind, will pass an invisible boundary; new, universal, and more liberal laws will begin to establish themselves around and within him; or the old laws be expanded, and interpreted in his favor in a more liberal sense, and he will live with the license of a higher order of beings.” ― Henry David Thoreau, Where I Lived, and What I Lived For

  14. Afshin says:

    Keep bringing up the Truth: Evil hates it!

  15. Gina says:

    Think it’s well past time the good, honest people of this world (formerly known as “conspiracy theorists”) turn this ship around and begin to label these psychopaths, cowards & nut jobs like Anderson Cooper, Bill Maher, Bill O’Reilly, Piers Morgan, etc. etc. etc. etc. and everyone else like them, including their minions, as such. THEY need to become the new “conspiracy theorists”. So Jon, thanks for being one of the pioneers.

    These cowards are so very responsible for this bleak, dark world that has been brought in as, time after time after time, on their watch they shut down any normal human dialogue and conversations – conversations by good people who know they are being massively lied to by every establishment figure – and lied to by them about everything, and this includes these media gatekeepers of the “official stories”, i.e. lies. And tipping the hat to Mike Adams and your conversation with him last Jon, who suggests creating a list of those who clearly have violated the sovereign rights of all of us over the years, including these media cowards – I’m all for it. We need this list so that when humanity finally begins to right itself from this Orwellian nightmare, we know of those who walk amongst us who are not human, and who do not deserve to share this new world with us, those who have tirelessly tried instead to to keep us locked into the Matrix – a world of lies, illusion and deceit. These people should be shunned for all eternity.

    The good news is that milllions are now awake and are rising up to declare they will have none of it anymore.

  16. David Meller says:

    Isn’t it interesting that the same people, in academia, the “news” media, or government who are the noisiest in demonizing and attacking “conspiracy theory along with its students and proponents, are people who LIE about everything?

    What haven’t these people lied about? Pearl Harbor, the major assasinations of the XX century such as the Kennedy brothers and Rev. M.L. King, the origins of the crash of ’29 and the subsequent great depression, Gulf of Tonkin incident, how ‘vaccines prevent disease”, the global warming/climate change insanity, the origins of 9/11 and destruction of WTC twin towers and building #7, “they hate us for our freedom”…and so on!

    They lie about everything, and when inconsistancies or fraud is uncovered, they never retract or apologise, but cover up with more lies, and more lies after that!

    Conspiracy ‘theories’ indeed? You are denounced for uncovering and popularizing conspiracy FACTS, and exposing the pathological liars who suppress them.


  17. Steve Naidamast (Sr. Software Engineer\Military Historan) says:

    I saw the Rense\Weidner video and I too was somewhat interested in the fact the people being shown did not seem to have any emotion relating to the grief and horror they had just experienced. HOWEVER, before we accept such a video as proof of something more insidious than what was being reported lets understand a few things about people in general.

    All people are different all being the result of their experiences in life. I was at the WTC when it was attacked in 2001. My reactions were that of a soldier being swept up in a sudden dangerous situation. However, that is because I was trained with a military mindset. Instead of running I went and got my own people out of my agency’s building before leaving for my client in mid-Manhattan. Does that mean that I didn’t experience shock or horror? On the contrary, it took me 9 months to get over the experience. However, at the time I would have been seen as perfectly calm.

    As this relates to the Sandy Hook residents, they too could have had similar training in their backgrounds, which often kicks in automatically under such circumstances.

    Next, many people faced with a sudden, horrific situation, no matter how personal suddenly shut down to avoid the overwhelming grief, which allows them to react as if nothing had happened.

    As a result, to fully understand both the RenseWeidner video and its critics one has to dig deeper to also understand the people being shown, their backgrounds, the timing of the taping, and the many other circumstances surrounding this horrific tragedy that affected these people so deeply. And one has to also understand and witness the “aftershock” that these people experienced after the event was removed from the public eye.

    When you get all of the facts then and only then can anyone come to a plausible conclusion that something other than what we have all seen in the mass media may have been the case… or not…

    Rushing to judgement that something insidious is always underlying major events these days is an understandable reaction to the promoted horrors all people are witnessing and experiencing on a daily basis. However, all judgments must be made with restraint and corroborative factual understanding before being able to accept them as plausible. Anything else and the promotion of this or that theory is nothing more than foolish conjecture…

  18. Ricky Allen says:

    Normal thought processes cannot help but occur when empirical (see it with your own eyes) data is presented right in front of a normal-thinking educated individual. Mind control, occult connections, top level gov complicity, transhumanism, false flag event, media manipulation, mass control, overclass secrecy, bio-electric implants, chemical warfare on kids, secret government, zombie actors. Doesn’t it seem like the same group of words keep rising to the surface . . And isn’t it interesting that all roads seem to lead back to the grandaddy . . . 911.

  19. Ian says:

    Seitz-wald is just trying to further his career and “play along.” Another reason for the lack of humanity is the paycheck incentive. Write the piece or find a new job.

  20. GeneralButler says:


    Thank you for articulating my exact feelings. I heard the Jeff Rense / Jay Weidner discussion – their observations were on the money. But here’s where it get kinds of weird – what is this “Archon” concept? After agreeing wholeheartedly with their observations, I hope that they aren’t concluding these are demonic lizard people? Thanks for any lucidity on this point.

  21. Chris says:

    Hello, Jon. I’ve been somewhat of a lurker for the last few months and I’ve just been captivated by how you can put everything we’re thinking ino words, because a lot of times it’s difficult. At least at first, I guess.. Here’s a lil snippet from yahoo (casual visitor) I thought would make you laugh…

  22. hybridrogue1 says:

    Absolutely vibrant living human commentary my man.

    I read the Salon pc. yesterday and became very angry with Seitz-Wald.

    I think it obvious that he has an agenda, and that he is a paid shill for that agenda. These comments and questioning him to look into his own humanity won’t touch him in the slightest. He sold himself long ago.

    GeneralButler ask’s “what is this “Archon” concept?”

    My advice is simple, look it up with your search engine. You are obviously on the web.


  23. I sort of like what Seitz-Wald did. He lowered Salon’s stock.
    I see the same thing with Snopes. More people urging: don’t trust Snopes.
    If the official Sandy Hook story doesn’t hold up, obviously Obama will be hurt. But the official media will be hurt just as much. They may be starting to see that.

  24. Barbara says:

    Well done, Jon. Thank you for reporting from the human side.

    Whenever I’m labeled a conspiracy theorist I reply…. NO, I’m on a quest for knowledge and anyone on a quest for knowledge will explore ALL theories thankyouverymuch!

  25. Anonymous says:

    What is Seitz-Wald? 26 years old? His brain isn’t even fully developed yet. When Bush was in office he was a “Truther”. Op-eds by punks like this are nothing but digital toilet paper.

  26. C. Burkey says:

    Ha ha…digital toilet paper!!

    Seriously, though. I was listening to a radio host named Mike Malloy on K-Talk AM 1150 in LA. Apparently his show won’t be on the station anymore, but at some point in time I was listening in and heard him ranting and raving about the guy who wrote the article questioning the Sandy Hook narrative. I was not a regular MM listener but I do find him funny sometimes, and he was just livid..that anyone should QUESTION! And it reminded me that I’ve never heard him question 9/11. Of course they don’t allow that on the radio …well, anyway, it was a bizarre thing to hear.

    Your writings are such a comfort. Thanks.

  27. C. Burkey says:

    Oh. And “people mourn in different ways” was not an allowance made for the much-demonized Scott Peterson, who was convicted of murdering his wife Laci (on slim to no evidence) in a made-for-TV festival of “coverage” on netrworks that handily ignored the mess of the Iraq war.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.