Wolfgang Halbig heads to Newtown for the truth about Sandy Hook
by Jim Fetzer
After submitting one FOIA request after another, which the authorities have entirely ignored, he is putting his boots on the ground and going after those records in person himself.
Wolf will be attending the Newtown School Board meeting scheduled for 7:30 PM/ET on Tuesday, 6 May 2014, to ask the members of the school board sixteen simple questions to which he has been unable to obtain answers.
Wolf came to the country’s attention through a stunning interview with Dave Gahary of American Free Press, which, I would estimate, has had hundreds of thousands of listeners across the US and the world:
Indeed, I have asked Dave Gahary whether, if Wolf were to visit Newtown, AFP would send him to cover it, to which he has informed me the answer is, “Yes!” And I am quite sure other reporters and papers will want to cover his visit as well.
Jeff Rense and Alex Jones
The reason, of course, is obvious: Wolf has the background and qualifications as an expert on school safety to be in the position to resolve a perplexing national quagmire, where local, state and even federal authorities are suppressing information.
The destruction of the crime scene was striking for the lifetime gag-order imposed upon those who were involved in its demolition and the extreme security that surrounded it, which was yet another in a pattern of suppressing evidence about what actually happened at Sandy Hook.
Additional studies support the conclusion that this had not been an operating school for several years. One of the reasons for confronting the School Board, therefore, is that its members cannot not know that the school was virtually abandoned and had been awaiting future demolition.
Wolf’s 16 Questions
From all of the attempts to discredit Wolf, one might infer that he is some kind of radical out to stir up concerns where none are warranted. But the issues that he has raised appear to be very simple and straightforward, which are raised by published accounts, press reports and the video record. Here are sixteen:
1. Who on 14 December 2012 was the Incident Commander as required by the Federal Emergency Management Administration in directing the Mass Casualty Shooting Incident at the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
2. Who and Why did they not request the Life Star Helicopters knowing that children and school staff are seriously injured and clinging to life?
3. Who and Why did they not allow the Paramedics and the EMTs inside the Sandy Hook School to treat any seriously injured children and school staff clinging to life?
4. Who declared all eighteen children and six school staff members legally dead within the first eight minutes? [NOTE: Two were claimed to have been transported to a local hospital before they died. The purported shooter, Adam Lanza, and his mother, Nancy Lanza, are not included in this count.]
5. Who was the Certified Environmental Bio-Hazard Decontamination company contracted by the Newtown Public Schools to remove gallons of blood, skull fragments, brain tissues, bodily fluids, blood soaked carpets and decontaminate areas inside the Sandy Hook School?
6. Why does an off duty Lieutenant from the Newtown Police Department refuse to leave his off duty work assignment at a construction site on 14 December 2012 after hearing that shots have been fired at the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
7. Who at the Newtown Public Schools notified all of the parents in writing (as required by CT law) that had children attending the Sandy Hook Elementary School as well as every school staff member every school year of all the potential life threatening chemical hazards? [NOTE: The school had high levels of lead paint throughout the entire school, Asbestos in the ceiling tiles and floor tiles, asbestos in the insulation and, most of all, the school had a very high levels of PCB. Check out what PCB is and it should scare any parent.]
8. Who provided the urgent medical care for the two children who were not transported to the Danbury Trauma Center until an hour after the school was deemed safe for that 15-mile drive?
9. Who treated those two children who had been shot multiple times–as many as 3 to 11 times–since they did not allow the paramedics and EMTs inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
10. Why did the parents of the two children who died at the Danbury Trauma Center not allow their children to donate their organs to other children waiting for the gift of life?
11. What happened to the 500 children and 60 school staff members from Sandy Hook Elementary School on 14 December 2012?
12. Who was the police officer calling into the Newtown Police dispatcher stating in his words that he has multiple weapons, he has a rifle and a shotgun and who has the rifle and the shotgun as the chain of evidence should show that was found in Classroom 8?
13. Why would a police officer by the name of Lt Vangehle at 9:45:21 am on 14 December 2012 from the Newtown Police Department after finding a kindergarten female child in the hallway make her go into Classroom 8 and leave her? That was a gruesome crime scene with dead children and school staff. Who would do that?
14. Why would two CT State Troopers enter Classroom 10 at 9:55:31 am on 14 December 2012–which was a gruesome crime scene with dead bodies of children and school staff–and tell a kindergarten boy who they find in the bathroom whose name is redacted and tell them so it must be more than one to stay and they will be both back when it is safe?
15. Who ordered the porta-potties that showed up at the scene of the crime about three hours after the event?
16. Who ordered the twenty-six Christmas trees that were stored behind the Firehouse on 14 December 2012 and then brought out to be decorated to commemorate the twenty-six reported victims?
This last question is remarkable by itself because, had the Firehouse been conducting a Christmas tree sale, it would have been normal to have had dozens and dozens of trees, not just the right number to equal the number of victims:
It is not just the improbability of having 26 trees for 26 victims, but that those trees were there before the shooting had taken place. Notice, too, that none of these questions is sensitive. So why won’t the authorities answer them?
What’s going on?
Remarkably, Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States, visited Governor Malloy of Connecticut just a few weeks before the Sandy Hook event. Holder is a gun-control zealot, it appears, and wants to “brainwash” the public to adopt a new anti-gun attitude, even though it violates the 2nd amendment of the Constitution he has sworn to uphold. That is far from the most intriguing aspect of this documentary, which sheds a great deal of light on the rationale for Sandy Hook:
Notice, for example, that Governor Malloy tells reporters he and the Lt. Governor had been “spoken to” about an event like this taking place–no doubt, by the Attorney General. But what kind of event could that have been? If it were an actual mass shooting, then surely he ought to have taken steps to insure it did not happen, which he did not do. So it would appear that he had been informed that a drill would take place that would be presented as though it were real.
Anyone who remains in doubt that this was indeed a drill presented as though it had been real should consider the virtually complete absence of genuine, sincere grief displayed by the victim’s survivors. Here is a rather remarkable retrospective of “Sandy Hook Smiles: The happiest families in the world”. Bear in mind, they have recently lost members of their families:
For the latest illustration of genuine grief when confronted with the death of loved ones, just watch the reaction of those who learned that Malaysian Airline’s Flight 370 had finally been determined to be lost at sea and compare it with the virtual delight displayed by the Sandy Hook survivors. The contrast between these two cases is stunning and revealing.
The Enduring Cover-Up
During several debates about Sandy Hook, the first with Keith Johnson, the second with Michael Collins Piper–I emphasized the “Top Ten Reasons” that this appears to have been an elaborate hoax, including:
(1) that proof of death has been suppressed, (2) that emergency protocols were not followed, (3) that drill protocols were followed, (4) that there was foreknowledge of the event, (5) that there was confusion over what weapons were used, (6) that the suspect cannot possibly have carried out the shooting as claimed, (7) that strange behavior was displayed by officials, witnesses and relatives, (8) that there are many odd photos of participants, (9) that the crime scene was destroyed under conditions of secrecy, and (10) that some of the children even appear to have been featured as singers at the Super Bowl.
Here are four crucial cases, which, each on its own, ought to raise serious doubt that children were actually killed at Sandy Hook and support the inference that this was a drill. Taken together, they leave scant room for doubt about the truth of the matter, which Wolfgang Halbig will undoubtedly confirm during his visit to Newtown. What would it mean, after all, if none of his questions are answered and his access to information is curtailed? If Sandy Hook happened as claimed, then ongoing research will confirm it; and if it did not, the world–especially the American public–deserves to know.
Case One: The NYC Gold Shield Detective
As I had explained in my opening statement during the first debate, there are multiple visual indications that we are dealing with a drill, including a portable sign, “EVERYONE MUST CHECK IN”, which is the featured image in the “Top Ten Reasons” article; that almost everyone, including firemen, were wearing name tags on lanyards; and that virtually no one was in business dress or office clothing as though they had rushed to the scene from work. On the contrary, they are almost all in casual or informal clothing, which would be appropriate for a drill. And many of them are walking in circles, out one door of the Firehouse a 1/2 mile from the school and back in another, again and again, which Sofia Smallstorm captured in her brilliant video study, “Unraveling Sandy Hook”, which makes no sense if it had been a real event, but does if it was instead a drill.
Because Keith Johnson had contended that registration signs and name tags on lanyards were “standard police procedures” at crime scenes, I contacted Jim Rothstein, a Gold Shield Detective from New York City, whom I know from JFK research, and asked him if that was indeed a common practice or if he had ever heard of it being done. His response was plain and simple: “No.” We discussed it a bit more and it became obvious to me that he thought that was a ridiculous claim to make. So I was sure to include it during the later stages of our debate, which Piper simply ignored.
Case Two: The ATF Special Assistant
During the third round of the first debate, I also observed that, although the “official narrative” would have you believe that Adam Lanza was a firearms fanatic, ATF Special Assistant Agent Gene Marquez said that his agency “has not been able to uncover any evidence that the mother and the son were actively engaged in going to the gun ranges, practicing marksmanship, or anything of that nature.”
During the second hour of her interview with Mike Power, Joyce Riley mentions a Wall Street Journal article that stated they couldn’t find any evidence of Nancy or Adam Lanza going to any of the shooting ranges in that local area. In a video, “No Gun Permit Under Nancy Lanza’s Name in public records, says TIME Magazine”, at 57 sec mark, there is a screen shot from TIME, saying that in a public records search, they could find no firearms or weapons permits under Nancy’s name:
Video description: Published on Jan 11, 2013- So gun permit records are public knowledge, and major news outlets are unable to find any for Nancy Lanza. Not even for the AR-15 rifle? The police are saying that those guns were registered to her and she had permits for them, but apparently the public records themselves are not supporting their theories.
Case Three: The FBI’s former Top Shrink
The behavior of several of the key participants in the Sandy Hook event, including especially Gene Rosen, struck me and a number of others as highly inappropriate. Gene Rosen is one of the most prolific of the Sandy Hook media stars but has given animated and conflicting statements to a series of reporters (in English and Spanish). Considered a “good Samaritan” by the mainstream media, he reportedly harbored six children from the school.
I was so struck by the crucial role of Gene Rosen that I asked a friend of mine, Alen Salerian, M.D., who had originally contacted me about JFK research, for his evaluation of Gene Rosen’s testimony as presented in the video interview we included in “Top Ten Reasons”. As the former head of the FBI Rapid Response Psychiatric Unit, I thought his opinions would clarify and illuminate what we have here:
He wrote back on the basis of his review of the Gene Rosen interview, which we had included in “Top Ten Reasons”:
Gene Rosen was a key witness who corroborated the official story of the Sandy Hook elementary school killings. Rosen reported that, six children after witnessing the murder of their teacher Vicky Soto sought refuge at his home.
Mr. Rosen had already heard gunfire from an automatic weapon.
According to Mr. Rosen, the kids seemed nervous while they drank orange juice and played with stuffed animals. He never called 911. It took 15 minutes or more for the kids to begin talking about the horrific events including the death of their teacher.
Obvious inconsistencies of Gene Rosen’s statement:
A. For six kids for 15 minutes not to say anything about their frightening experience is both unlikely and psychologically impossible. Common response would be a disorganized emotional venting and vivid mental images of the events.
B. It’s unlikely and illogical for an adult not to call 911 under these conditions.
C. It is unlikely and illogical for an adult not to obtain further information from children under very unusual circumstances–an unplanned visit by six kids without an adult. It’s even more unlikely for an adult who had already heard gunfire not to call 911 nor to find out what had occurred.
D. The You Tube video of Rosen contradicts his main claim that for 15 minutes he did not know what had happened. In this video–at 22 seconds–Rosen reports concerns about the dead teacher, Ms. Vicki Soto.
Based upon A, B, C and D, it is reasonable to conclude that Gene Rosen misrepresented the truth of what occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School. It is quite reasonable to consider that Mr. Rosen was intentionally misinforming the public and the movie was filmed even before the alleged school shootings. The key evidence to support this possibility is the error in the movie regarding the death of Vicky Soto. This error is consistent with a signature trait of preplanned crimes. For instance Pres. Kennedy’s death was published in The Christchurch Star in New Zealand before the president was assassinated. Also, BBC announced the collapse of the seventh building on 9/11 some 23 minutes before the actual collapse.
Of importance, engineered complex crimes share a common denominator of evidence of advanced planning as shown by Rosen’s video and actions.
Remarkably, even though this discussion was included in the fourth round of the first debate, Michael Collins Piper appeared to be oblivious and made no response at all to my invitation.
Case Four: The School Security Expert
By the sheerest coincidence, I had come into contact with a nationally recognized expert on school security, Wolfgang Halbig, who is also a former Florida State Trooper and school principal. I was so impressed by his background and credentials that I did an interview with him as promptly as it could be arranged, where he had been attempting to obtain a copy of an FBI investigative report about Sandy Hook, but was repeatedly rebuffed and told it had been classified and that would not be released “in his lifetime”. That interview is now available in “The Real Deal” archives:
Indeed, after contacting the FBI Field Office in New Haven, CT, seeking the investigative report on the school shooting under the Connecticut and US Freedom of Information Act, Wolfgang Halbig, who is both a former Florida State Trooper and also a former school principal, was informed that it was “classified” and that he would never see it. This report went to Attorney General Eric Holder, President Barack Obama and Robert S. Mueller, former Director of the FBI.
Because of his inquiries about Sandy Hook, two Lake County, FL, homicide investigators showed up at Mr. Halbig’s home and, on behalf of the Connecticut State Police, threatened him with prosecution should he continue to ask questions about Sandy Hook. I have spoken with him several times and he, too, is convinced that this was an elaborate hoax. “Why would they classify an FBI report about a school shooting”, he asks, “if it was on the up-and-up?”, which I regard as a very good question.
Wolfgang has observed that, in actual emergencies, such as Sandy Hook has been portrayed to be, med evac helicopters would have been on the scene to transport those little bodies to hospitals, where qualified doctors could determine whether they were dead or alive, which EMTs–apart from extraordinary cases, such as when the head has been separated from the body–are not authorized to do. Beyond the absence of med evac helicopters, a Connecticut State Police chopper was on the scene at 9:15 AM/ET, when the first 911 call would not come in until 9:35:39 AM/ET:
Why Wolfgang Matters
As a school safety expert, Wolfgang’s opinions count in a courtroom, during depositions and in other legal contexts. He has emphasized to me the importance of determining who has lied about Sandy Hook, especially in giving depositions based only on their documented statements. He has offered two examples about officers who made calls about Sandy Hook:
Example: the police officer inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School who during a police transmission at 9:55:27 am on Dec 14, 2012 to the Newtown Police Dispatcher states in his own words that “Please be advised that we have multiple weapons including long weapon and shotgun inside the building”.
The officer who made this transmission has to be held accountable for his actions in this case, since he is reporting facts that are not in evidence and have not been substantiated by subsequent investigation. “Misdirection and Misinformation is what keeps people chasing their tail and creates serous confusion”, he has observed. As another illustration of an officer whose identity needs to be determined to be held accountable:
Example: a police officer during a police transmission at 10:00:45 am on Dec 14, 2012 to the dispatch is requesting “Doctors”–not a doctor, but “Doctors”–inside the school, yet they refused to allow the Paramedics or the EMTs inside the school. If this is was an urgency based on this radio transmission on Dec 14, 2012, then why was there no Trauma Helicopter request?
Wolfgang has observed that one way to get to the truth about Sandy Hook is to hold those who made these official transmissions accountable for their actions, especially when the weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that this was a drill but was presented as though it had been an actual school shooting massacre. The American people appear to have been brought to the edge of hysteria by an elaborate hoax.
Wolfgang under attack
Those who speak out on complex and controversial events like Sandy Hook (JFK, 9/11 or the Boston bombing) are invariably subjected to attacks, typically by exaggerating their positions to make them easier to attack (the “straw man”), by selecting evidence that supports your position and ignoring the rest (“special pleading”) or, especially, by attacking the messenger and hoping the message will be lost (the “ad hominem”).
Wolf has been no exception, where one of the latest attacks has challenged some of his 16 questions as though they had obvious answers or were simply irrelevant. One of the best exchanges with Wolf was conducted by “Tony”, who interviewed him in an exchange found on YouTube (above). Those who have thought through their positions about Wolf are inclined to come to his support, as in the case of “Odinrock” endorsing him here:
Because Wolf is soliciting donations to support his research into Sandy Hook and to initiate legal actions that are intended to reveal the truth, he has been assailed as a “money-grubber” who is acting to promote his own self-interest. But as the first one who interviewed Wolf and who makes frequent contact with him–and as he himself has observed–he is not making a dime from any of this. He deserves all of our support.
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=293796