Posts Tagged disarming the amercian people

The Two things you can’t talk about on You Tube: Nobody died at Sandy Hook and the Government wants our guns.

Posted by Joe Imbriano in Government sponsored terrorism, In honor and memorium of, The twighlight's last gleaming on March 8, 2018

You talk about this on You Tube and your channel goes down for good. There are two distinct reasons folks. The government wants the American people to believe their propaganda films with crisis actors and the government wants us disarmed because they have such horrible things planned for us that they don’t want any resistance. Such things as a currency collapse, staged outbreaks of disease, forced relocations, confiscation of assets, bank accounts, property, retirement accounts, forced vaccinations, forced irradiation with the 5G systems and forced medical procedures are to name just a few of the sinister eugenics agendas on the table.

The government will kill children and run real shootings and frame a patsy, and they will run false flag Hollywood productions just like Sandy Hook.Watch this video that You Tube keeps taking down. I have tried to upload it several times and this is what happens. TOTAL CENSORSHIP. WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID OF?

It is amazing. The media including You Tube which is all run by the government, is beyond a joke, it is an outright criminal enterprise. The movie documents the extraordinary journey of Wolfgang Halbig, a former state trooper, teacher, insurance adjuster and most importantly, a professional school safety advisor on his quest for truth. This man sought basic public information from the officials of Newtown. What he found instead, was an illegal and impenetrable wall of secrecy. This makes you have to question what they are hiding and why the government wants us disarmed. That right there alone should send shivers up and down your spine if you really have one.

https://youtu.be/ols9h8cJOfo

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 (self.conspiracy)

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.
  • Executive order (National Defense Authorization Act) allows the news media to use propaganda on the american public
  • 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?

  • attorney general Eric Holder made a trip to Newtown to speak with governor Malloy mere weeks before the event (someone had “spoken to him”)
  • 0 murders in Newtown in the 2012 FBI Crime Report
  • kid literally says it was a drill on the Dr. Oz show before Dr. Oz nervously changes the subject
  • the best evidence anyone can present to even prove Adam Lanza was a real person is a video of a guy with longish hair playing Dance Dance Revolution, which doesn’t even show the guy’s face. Also Lanza’s death was listed in the Social Security Death Index as occurring on 12/13, one day before the event.

you can go on and on with these bullet points. It’s the hoax that keeps giving.

[–]jbrs_[S] 7 points 

can you link to the Dr Oz thing?

and that’s crazy about Adam Lanza

[–]joe_jaywalker 8 points 

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.

[–]swansong19 9 points 

It’s called The Life of Adam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu6gj1Sirc0

[–]jbrs_[S] 8 points 

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

[–]Zenyx_ 9 points 

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.

[–]jbrs_[S] 5 points 

Yeah, I agree “what would you like to say to your teachers … about friday” is a terrible question and seems like a deflection

[–]joe_jaywalker 12 points 

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.

Not to mention you can possibly brush his interview off, just as you can dismiss one of your bullet points as a coincidence, but taken among the multitudinous others they are overwhelmingly definitive. Similarly, there is a whole compilation of Sandy Hook kids who “say the darnedest things.”

[–]Comethatmebro 2 points 

They do jump on it quick but I think the kid just ment during the lock down drill.

[–]battlehorns 2 points 

God bless you for posting the documentary. This is so chilling.

[–]tpYOURfb 9 points 

It’s all fucked up. if you believe that 9/11 was an inside job… this is peanuts compared to that.

[–]joe_jaywalker 9 points 

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.

[–]jbrs_[S] 10 points 

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 implausible theory. In this case, hardly anyone (not EMT) saw the bodies– not even the parents!

[–]fraac 11 points 

If the parents were actors, why prevent them from seeing the bodies?

Conspiracy theories need to have internal consistency, rather than just ladling contradictory suspicious features atop one another.

[–]haveyouseenmymarble 2 points 

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.

[–]jbrs_[S] 1 point 

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.

[–]perfect_pickles 2 points 

only so many died that day, there are some very pissed off relatives that suggests that some did die that day.

[–]joe_jaywalker 2 points 

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.

[–]MollysBrownPizza 5 points 

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.

[–]bagginse 2 points 

What about the video of Gene rehearsing his lines to camera??

MORE COMMENTS

More from r/conspiracy

  HIDE
11.7k

Trump suggests that we execute drug dealers to deal with our opiod epidemic. Do NOT fall for this shit. This policy would lead to low level offenders getting executed while the pharmaceutical execs who peddle pills by the millions into poor communities would continue getting rich. (self.conspiracy)

submitted   by relevantlife

5455

Congresswoman: “Big pharma keeps pushing back against legalizing medical marijuana because, in many cases, they want to continue to sell addictive drugs and dominate the market for drugs that address chronic pain. That’s wrong. “ (twitter.com)

submitted  by AssuredlyAThrowAway

5212

This was driving around San Diego, CA (imgur.com)

submitted  by 12-23-1913

3641

In 2009, DynCorp employees hired a 15-year-old boy to strip dance for them. Hillary Clinton covered this up because she received money from DynCorp. This was revealed through WikiLeaks, yet no mainstream media is covering this. (wikileaks.org)

submitted  by Bucks2001

2834

A family is being persecuted for exposing high ranking pedophiles (youtu.be)

submitted  by kbs42142

2811

No Such Thing As Medical Marijuana,’ Trump Health Chief Says. Alex Azar who was once a former executive of pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly & Co said this statement recently. A little conflict of interest,wouldn’t you agree? (marijuanamoment.net)

submitted  by trickymason

2270

When people argue FOR YouTube’s right to discriminate, as “it is a Private Company”… I can’t help but think of a certain Baker who refused to bake a certain wedding cake and the ensuing firestorm and outrage that followed. (self.conspiracy)

submitted  by odd-meter

2188

Video mods not letting this one slide. (i.redd.it)

submitted  by inkoverflow

2090

Reddit is going to use this “Elimination of Russian troll accounts” as a way of shadowbanning/deleting any accounts that show dissent to the popular opinion. (self.conspiracy)

submitted  by Randomxenomorph

2081

“90% of the media is now controlled by just six companies, down from 50 in 1983, according to a Frugal Dad infographic from last year.”(informationclearinghouse.info)

submitted  by DisregardedWhy

Comments, continued…

[–]a-n-o-n-88 6 points 

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

[–]jbrs_[S] 7 points 

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)

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.

[–]a-n-o-n-88 5 points 

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

[–]jbrs_[S] 2 points 

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.

[–]mpg1846 1 point 

What gun control measures?

[–]jbrs_[S] 1 point 

here is one. I would guess there are others.

[–]bagginse 2 points 

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.

[–]fraac 3 points 

School shootings never affect gun control laws (except in other countries). They help gun sales. Insider trading?

I’m trying to imagine what kind of event might cause gun restrictions in America. Not easy. If black people started shooting white people, they’re more likely to restrict black people than guns.

[–]jbrs_[S] 1 point 

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.

[–]joe_jaywalker 2 points 

$$$$$$$. 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.

We need more comments like yours.

[–]a-n-o-n-88 3 points 

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.

[–]joe_jaywalker 2 points 

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 laundered/disbursed to the participants and perpetrators. Like I said, the school apparently now isn’t even doing well.

[–]QbertPro543211 3 points 

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

[–]TrappedInThePantry 1 point 

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?

[–]joe_jaywalker 2 points 

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 rather than remaining in the realm of speculation. 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.

[–]perfect_pickles 1 point 

to rebuild the school,

‘SHES’ was never a school to begin with, the new building does not look like a normal school. more like a govt research building.

[–]swansong19 2 points 

50 million to build a new school in an area that had been seeing steadily decreasing enrolment numbers. Makes perfect sense to me.

[–]horridCAM666 2 points 

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.

[–]swansong19 2 points 

There’s a difference between choosing to not identify/see 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.

Beyond that, the odds that every single family would abdicate the identification process to strangers based on descriptions and photos is beyond coincidence.

[–]horridCAM666 2 points 

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.

[–]swansong19 2 points 

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

[–]martini-meow 2 points 

What where huh on the port a potties?

[–]Argh_Me_Maties 1 point 

Hmm…

 

, ,

5 Comments

Copyright © 2013 TheFullertonInformer.com. All rights reserved. TheFullertonInformer.com is the legal copyright holder of the material on this blog and it may not be used, reprinted, or published without express written permission. The information contained in this website is for entertainment and educational purposes ONLY. This website contains my personal opinion and experience based on my own research from scientific writings, internet research and interviews with doctors and scientists all over the world. Do not take this website, links or documents contained herein as a personal, medical or legal advice of any kind. For legal advice, please consult with your attorney. Consult your medical doctor or primary care physician for advice regarding your health and your children’s health and nothing contained on this website is intended to provide or be a substitute for medical, legal or other professional advice. The reading or use of this information is at your own risk. Readers will not be put on spam lists. We will not sell your contact information to another company. We are not responsible for the privacy practices of our advertisers or blog commenters. We reserve the right to change the focus of this blog, to shut it down, to sell it, or to change the terms of use at our discretion. We are not responsible for the actions of our advertisers or sponsors. If a reader purchases a product or service based upon a link from our blog, the reader must take action with that company to resolve the issue, not us. Our policy on using letters or emails that have been written directly to us is as follows: We will be sharing those letters and emails with the blogging audience unless they are requested to be kept confidential. We will claim ownership of those letters or emails to later be used in an up-and-coming book,blog article,post or column, unless otherwise specified by the writer to keep ownership. THE TRUTH WILL STAND ON ITS OWN AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE-SEEK IT AT ALL COSTS!