FBI Report: Sandy Hook Was a Hoax to Promote Gun Control

[JEBland]

I was just referring to the post I quoted. I was just curious as to who the former state trooper was. I took your response as indicating Wolfgang was the trooper in question. I’m not sure if you’re saying he is, or just repeating someone’s name. I’ll wait for NKBJ.

Perhaps I've gotten it wrong but from my own quick search earlier:

Wolfgang Halbig is a former teacher, school principle, U.S. Custom's agent, and retired Florida state trooper.

From http://www.lovethetruth.com/government/sandy_hook_hoax.htm
Probably should've used a VPN before clicking that link.

Sandy Hook denier charged with having victim's dad's ID info

SORRENTO, Fla. (AP) — A Florida man who repeatedly harassed parents of shooting victims at Sandy Hook Elementary School has been arrested for possessing the identification of one of the parents, authorities said.

apnews.com

Exposing the Sandy Hook hoaxers

Lenny Pozner used to believe in conspiracy theories — until his son's murder became one. Now he's taking on the people who say the Sandy Hook massacre never happened.

theweek.com

https://www.courthousenews.com/alex-jones-assailed-over-sandy-hook-hoax-bluster/

The last article states

Halbig, a 70-year-old former police officer and school administrator living in Florida [...]

 

[NKBJ]

A quick Google search seems to indicate he wasn’t present at Sandy Hook. The guy who wrote the AAR I’m referring to was there. He responded to the shooter’s home and found his deceased mother, and then responded to the school. He gave a presentation about the incident and I believe 100% it happened as he said.

Please understand, of a certainty I have no interest in taking you to task over what your acquaintance stated. That's not of any concern of mine. I know I don't know what led up to and then happened at the Sandy Hook school, only what some people have said.
But I am interested in what people who do think might have to say so I asked if you had any thoughts on why the guy would do this, to go with the nobody died narrative.

 

[jsharmon7]

Please understand, of a certainty I have no interest in taking you to task over what your acquaintance stated. That's not of any concern of mine. I know I don't know what led up to and then happened at the Sandy Hook school, only what some people have said.
But I am interested in what people who do think might have to say so I asked if you had any thoughts on why the guy would do this, to go with the nobody died narrative.

Fair question. It could be an old man looking to feel important again. He could be lonely and likes attention. It could be that a series of things led him to believe something that doesn’t seem to be true. It could be psychological protection by getting himself to believe something that awful didn’t really happen. I deal with a lot of people who have views or realities that don’t make any sense. I feel bad for him for the problems he’s caused himself.

Also, I wasn’t taking your comment negatively. I was asking in order to determine if this was someone who had direct knowledge himself. That would change why he’d think such a thing.

 

[JettaKnight]

Fair question. It could be an old man looking to feel important again. He could be lonely and likes attention. It could be that a series of things led him to believe something that doesn’t seem to be true. It could be psychological protection by getting himself to believe something that awful didn’t really happen. I deal with a lot of people who have views or realities that don’t make any sense. I feel bad for him for the problems he’s caused himself.

Also, I wasn’t taking your comment negatively. I was asking in order to determine if this was someone who had direct knowledge himself. That would change why he’d think such a thing.

I feel bad for the parents who lost children then had to be harassed by him.

 

[BigRed]

Query:

Did the event at Sandy Hook do more to advance infringements upon the natural rights documented in the second amendment or did it do more to advance Liberty?

 

[jamil]

Query:

Did the event at Sandy Hook do more to advance infringements upon the natural rights documented in the second amendment or did it do more to advance Liberty?

That’s not really a relevant question if the conversation is about what really happened. Or if you’re saying that it is relevant, I’d call that circular reasoning.

 

[JettaKnight]

Query:

Did the event at Sandy Hook do more to advance infringements upon the natural rights documented in the second amendment or did it do more to advance Liberty?

Depends on the location, but in the whole, AFAIK, things are getting less restrictive.

I can get a lifetime handgun license for free, and in many places I don't need one. And I can carry what is essentially an SBR simply by having a useless strap on an uncomfortable buttstock.

Who would have thought we'd come out of the Obama years on the plus side?

 

[HoughMade]

Query:

Did the event at Sandy Hook do more to advance infringements upon the natural rights documented in the second amendment or did it do more to advance Liberty?

I'm with you. 59 people were killed in Chicago in October which will undoubtedly be used to argue in favor of gun control. Therefore,....

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Who would have thought we'd come out of the Obama years on the plus side?

Well, me in 2012:

Guys, again, calm down. The Republicans aren't going along with any new gun control laws. The Democrats remember the legislative backlash from the last time they passed it. The Dems will talk to their base, then let this die a cold and lonely death once emotions calm down. Just like Obama did the first 4. Promises to keep the base happy, doesn't actually do it because the reality forces it another way.

Even when you get good news, confirmation that the world isn't about to crash down on your ears and steal your guns, you want to blow it off and concentrate on the paranoia and fear. Relax.

and 2013:

No. Nothing's changed since the gun control advocacy was dealt a smackdown after Newtown. The debate hasn't changed, there's no new emotional appeal, the sides are still entrenched, the same congress critters hold the same seats, etc. They have other things on their plate in DC, the debt ceiling, etc.

Panic if you like, I said from the beginning of the last 'panic' that there would be no new gun control. I stand by that this time as well.

From the Democrat side, there are a lot of states where Democrat voters are also pro-gun. Harsher federal legislation makes it very difficult for them to side with their party. POTUS can beat the drum, the Democrats who need to can pander to their base, Democrats who need to can stay quiet, and in the end they can blame the Republicans for being obstructionists. Note the Democrats stay pretty quiet on gun control when they could actually force it through without a single R vote? But once the R has the ability to stop them... R does the same thing. Both sides need the other to be the foil when they want to pretend to pass what they said they would but don't *really* want to pass what they said they would. I'm more concerned about an R who flips or is lukewarm than a D who is foaming at the mouth anti-gun.

 

[jamil]

Plus, Antifa seems to be into guns now. They vote Democrat, right?