Here are the things that stood out for me from Dear Wolfgang, the Sandy Hook documentary, in case you didn't get a chance to watch
72 2017-09-26 by jbrs_
edit: I want to be clear that none of this should be taken as a justification for harassing anyone. Not only is that unnecessary, but it's counterproductive in that it creates a negative stereotype that further stifles discussion. Moreover, it is terribly wrong in the case that we are wrong-- we should never presume to have certainty that we are right, and from there reason that the ends justify the means, because the downside is that we are missing something and we end up doing serious harm; and there are alternative ways with a much smaller potential for downside ( in this case, reasonable discourse with emphasis on facts and logic) of arriving at the intended goal. That has to be the path for something like this.
I thought the Sandy Hook conspiracy was an absolutely absurd theory developed by people motivated to disarm the gun violence and need for gun control narrative. But it's never fair to completely dismiss a theory without hearing it; you have to take an impartial look at the evidence and form your opinion after that, trying to approach all new evidence without bias and leaving your opinion perpetually open to revision.
While you can't and wouldn't want to entertain every single theory because there just isn't enough time and many theories are bad, you don't want to prematurely separate out viable theories. So you have to come up with some way of deciding among the theories you know little about which you want to investigate and which you don't.
I have found one generally useful criteria is that a theory is worth investigating if there is absolutely stifling social stigma around so much as discussing it. This usually at minimum indicates that the issue hasn't received the usual level of scrutiny, and someone could be trying to use that feature to pass one over on the population. This criteria clearly applies with Sandy Hook.
Here are the things that stood out to me the most from Dear Wolfgang (edit: to be clear, most of this needs to be fact checked (except for a few points for which sufficient evidence is provided in the documentary):
incident report doesn't mention shooting, only "unwanted person"-- compare that to the purported audio of the 911 calls
everyone declared dead within 10 mins of shooting (by who?); EMT not allowed to enter building; no trauma helicopters called; ambulances not near entrance of school
why weren't the parents allowed to see their dead children? why did the parents agree to this? can you imagine a single set of parents doing this, much less all of them?
Wolfgang told by police he'd be arrested for calling port-a-potty company again after calling to ask who ordered port-a-potties.
Adam Lanza, the attacker, was a 112 lb kid who supposedly carried several guns and 50 lbs of ammunition, and shot and killed ~25 people in less than 10 minutes
Why were people going in circles around the firehouse to make themselves appear to look busy?
Lack on maintenance on the school obvious from pictures-- was it even a functioning school?
Refusal to give information about who was the incident commander
None of the parents who lost a child still live in Newtown (compare to Columbine, where half still lived in the area after losing a child)
Newtown has received over $200 million dollars from the federal government since the shooting; each parent got $281,000, and complained in a letter to the Connecticut AG when they didn't get more (not standard practice)
not a single parent has filed a lawsuit connecting to the shooting
three days before the shooting, the United Way already had a donation fund for the victims of Sandy Hook
Governor Malloy denies he said that someone had spoken to him and the Lt Governor about something like Sandy Hook happening despite video recording of him saying so in a televised announcement.
Crisis actors: Nancy and David Wheeler (allegedly actual actors); Dr. H Wayne Carver, allegedly involved in two different crisis events; Nick Phelps (he was also unconvincing in his statement) and Laura Phelps (allegedly actual actors)
Very odd reactions by families: one example: on day of event, walking away "It was awful, it was awful [laughs]" reporter asks child if she's okay and child gives cheery "mhmm".
No mention of field trip to Superbowl on School Board's Consent Agenda, which because it's an out-of-state field trip needs to be signed off by the principal, superintendent, and school board.
Resemblance of child in Sandy Hook choir who performed at superbowl with victims; NFL issues gag order to these children not to speak to anyone, and has yet to release the names of the children who performed; school board does not so much as mention performance in meeting that occurred within a day of the performance (performance occurred Feb 3rd 2013 and he says school board meeting was Feb 2nd 2013)
Wolfgang received threats to stop looking into Sandy Hook, including threats to his wife and sons' jobs
Will need to keep looking into it before developing a strong opinion about it, but certainly hard to square all of this with the official narrative. What do you all make of these points? Counter points encouraged.
44 comments
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
attorney general Eric Holder made a trip to Newtown to speak with governor Malloy mere weeks before the event
no mention of any murders in Newtown in the 2012 FBI Crime Report
you can go on and on with these bullet points. It's the hoax that keeps giving.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
can you link to the Dr Oz thing?
and that's crazy about Adam Lanza
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
Yeah there's a documentary about Lanza that I forget the name of, never actually watched it, but I've seen people link to it here a few times, which basically questions his existence.
Dr Oz clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwAH5AD0k-I
The shill rebuttal to this clip is that the kid was nervous and/or he was comparing the emergency scenario with a drill. If you want to believe that, sure I guess. But it's obvious that the women next to him and Dr. Oz are both not keen on letting him finish that thought.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
tbh that just seemed like the kid wasn't making much sense and he was trying to focus him on a topic
it is notable that he said "we were having a drill" though
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
It seemed to me that whatever else can be said about the kid, he did not have the demeanor of someone who actually lived through a mass shooting that killed 20 of his schoolmates.
1 Zenyx_ 2017-09-26
You can tell Oz doesn't even have a question. He's clearly steering away from the "drill" comment. He tells the kid to take his time and then immediately cuts him off to ask a question he hasn't even finished in his mind.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
Yeah, I agree "what would you like to say to your teachers ... about friday" is a terrible question and seems like a deflection
1 swansong19 2017-09-26
It's called The Life of Adam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu6gj1Sirc0
1 Comethatmebro 2017-09-26
They do jump on it quick but I think the kid just ment during the lock down drill.
1 battlehorns 2017-09-26
God bless you for posting the documentary. This is so chilling.
1 a-n-o-n-88 2017-09-26
I've always found this one as hard to believe simply because I cannot really see who benefited from it. Not saying it isn't possible, just that there aren't somewhat obvious gains made from it
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
That's what Wolfgang says about this. I don't know if it's true, needs more research. But there's also the gun control angle-- that it was intended to shift public opinion to help gun control measures to pass.
1 a-n-o-n-88 2017-09-26
Giving a town $200M isn't a benefit to the deep state, nor is paying out the parents. I don't recall any gun legislation being passed in it's wake, but I could be wrong.
Boston was much more apparent to me, as it enabled the roll out of locking down a whole town and allowing for warrant-less searches of peoples homes
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
I don't think the money is the benefit; think of it as that's all they had to pay to carry out this agenda in order to pass gun control measures. The documentary said connecticut passed several gun control measures after Sandy Hook.
1 mpg1846 2017-09-26
What gun control measures?
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
here is one. I would guess there are others.
1 bagginse 2017-09-26
I believe it may have also acted as some kind of high-audience ritual/psychological experiment. It certainly induced terror and fear to the public.
1 fraac 2017-09-26
School shootings never affect gun control laws. They help gun sales.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
the doc claims that gun control legislation was passed in CT following Sandy Hook. will have to double check. but yeah, if that's a known trend, maybe insider trading, though it seems less plausible.
I don't think that second part is true.
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
$$$$$$$. They got a ludicrous sum to rebuild the school, which apparently now has low enrollment trouble, not to mention the countless millions of donations from gullible and shaken Americans.
and each one of these events steers the conversation in the direction the government wants. I can no longer say to a normal person that video games don't cause violence because they can say Adam Lanza played video games and I am expected to take for granted that Sandy Hook was a real shooting.
1 a-n-o-n-88 2017-09-26
I can get behind the "steering the conversation" part, but there is no reason to think the MIC gives a fuck about rebuilding a school in some small town.
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
Oh yeah; I'm saying they received like 7x the amount of money that it would have taken to rebuild the school so that money was disbursed to the participants and perpetrators. Like I said, the school apparently now isn't even doing well.
1 perfect_pickles 2017-09-26
'SHES' was never a school to begin with, the new building does not look like a normal school. more like a govt research building.
1 swansong19 2017-09-26
50 million to build a new school in an area that had been seeing steadily decreasing enrolment numbers. Makes perfect sense to me.
1 QbertPro543211 2017-09-26
Tell them the supreme court found video games don't cause violence. It was an epic opinion. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Ass%27n
1 TrappedInThePantry 2017-09-26
So... their best money making scheme was to hatch a massive conspiracy with hundreds of actors? Relying on there being not one single actor who will spill the beans, intentionally or not?
Even if we accept that this is possible, if you could levy such an immense amount of coordination and secrecy, that is the best plan for making money you'd come up with?
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
By "actors" I guess you mean "players" or "participants," because there certainly weren't hundreds of actual actors playing roles, more like dozens. Indeed the number of conspirators necessary for any given conspiracy is always exaggerated by people who don't believe in conspiracies.
Anyway, the money-making aspect of Sandy Hoax was a definite side effect, but not the primary goal. It was a FEMA Capstone event and Obama signed over twenty executive orders involving gun control as a direct result. Also as this video is illustrating it is a sort of social experiment that is still being studied by the perpetrators.
You're better served looking at the evidence. It may seem unlikely that such a scam is possible, but undeniable after even a modest amount of honest research and critical thinking. Put it this way, I'm not 99.9% sure it was a hoax, that's too low.
1 tpYOURfb 2017-09-26
It's all fucked up. if you believe that 9/11 was an inside job... this is peanuts compared to that.
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
Yeah there's actually a "no one died on 9/11" theory but that has always seemed a little far-fetched to me.... unlike Sandy Hook where clearly no one died and everyone went home richer.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
I mean... you can see videos of people jumping out of the towers to their deaths. I know someone who died. That no one died in 9/11 is a seriously far fetched theory. In this case, hardly anyone (not EMT) saw the bodies-- not even the parents!
1 fraac 2017-09-26
If the parents were actors, why prevent them from seeing the bodies?
1 haveyouseenmymarble 2017-09-26
That's a good point. I'd imagine that to be for simplicity's sake. If the story was that the parents had to identify the kids, they might be asked to describe how it felt seeing their child in that way or what kinds of injuries they had. It would be a dick move by any reporter to go there, but by no means unheard of.
My guess is that barely anyone could convincingly describe such a tragedy, making any poor acting that much more obvious, and they already have plenty of that.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
I agree, I am just posting all of the interesting data points from the documentary for others to scrutinize and help build a coherent theory.
as for how those two might cohere, maybe the intention is to keep the operation as small as possible so that there are fewer chances for a slip up. if you bring in a morgue, you have to register all the dead bodies, have the parents show ID and sign in... just gets more complicated.
1 perfect_pickles 2017-09-26
only so many died that day, there are some very pissed off relatives that suggests that some did die that day.
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
I agree, I don't think the buildings were full of people who actually worked there. They wanted a number of people killed to be reminiscent of the death toll of Pearl Harbor.
1 Argh_Me_Maties 2017-09-26
Hmm...
1 horridCAM666 2017-09-26
As a newish father, I can understand nit wanting to see my baby boy riddled with bullets. The mere typing that out almost made me sick :( that said, Good post OP, thanks for giving me a list of bulletpoints for my own research.
1 swansong19 2017-09-26
There's a difference between choosing to not identifying your loved one and being told you are not allowed to see them.
Both Gilles Rousseau and the McDonnells claimed publicly that they were straight up told they would not be allowed to see their child.
Rousseau made the claim to the CBC and the McDonnells made the claim in their interview with Anderson Cooper.
1 horridCAM666 2017-09-26
Oh thats insane. I would equally lose my shit if I was told I wasnt ALLOWED to if I wanted to. People would be bloodied. Badly.
1 swansong19 2017-09-26
Agreed.
Here's a vid I did on the subject and other issues
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVcQNUqehQ0&t=272s
Rousseau's comments to the CBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYAS6sgZ4_Q
And the McDonnells bizarre interview with Cooper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQU_cFpibmU&t=25s
1 martini-meow 2017-09-26
What where huh on the port a potties?
1 MollysBrownPizza 2017-09-26
Let's not forget about the photo of Noah Pozner that was killed at Sandy Hook but somehow ends up in Pakistan as a victim of an attack on a school. https://www.infowars.com/mystery-sandy-hook-victim-dies-again-in-pakistan/
Or good old Gene Rosen, who reports that a school bus dropped kids off at his house AFTER the shooting and said that the kids were crying that their teacher was just killed. Why were kids on a bus, weren't they at the firehouse? (just go to YouTube, tons of his videos on there)
There's tons more... I don't know what happened, but it was so screwed up (their false flag) and poorly planned, you know SOMETHING was fishy.
1 bagginse 2017-09-26
What about the video of Gene rehearsing his lines to camera??
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
That's what Wolfgang says about this. I don't know if it's true, needs more research. But there's also the gun control angle-- that it was intended to shift public opinion to help gun control measures to pass.
1 joe_jaywalker 2017-09-26
$$$$$$$. They got a ludicrous sum to rebuild the school, which apparently now has low enrollment trouble, not to mention the countless millions of donations from gullible and shaken Americans.
and each one of these events steers the conversation in the direction the government wants. I can no longer say to a normal person that video games don't cause violence because they can say Adam Lanza played video games and I am expected to take for granted that Sandy Hook was a real shooting.
1 haveyouseenmymarble 2017-09-26
That's a good point. I'd imagine that to be for simplicity's sake. If the story was that the parents had to identify the kids, they might be asked to describe how it felt seeing their child in that way or what kinds of injuries they had. It would be a dick move by any reporter to go there, but by no means unheard of.
My guess is that barely anyone could convincingly describe such a tragedy, making any poor acting that much more obvious, and they already have plenty of that.
1 jbrs_ 2017-09-26
I agree, I am just posting all of the interesting data points from the documentary for others to scrutinize and help build a coherent theory.
as for how those two might cohere, maybe the intention is to keep the operation as small as possible so that there are fewer chances for a slip up. if you bring in a morgue, you have to register all the dead bodies, have the parents show ID and sign in... just gets more complicated.