Maybe you don’t read all of my posts. I don’t know, and I’m not about to tell you how to read blogs. Maybe you’re busy! But if you do have a tendency to jump around a bit, maybe you skipped right over my June 13th, 2016 entry, titled “Dust Your Checkbook Off, Wolfgang”. If so, let me get you up to speed: self-professed school, gay nightclub, and whatever else now expert Wolfgang Halbig has for years offered up a number of cash rewards, ranging from anywhere between $1,000 to $10,000, in exchange for very specific photographs from Sandy Hook Elementary School. “Easy money”, according to Halbig. But of course these rewards are entirely fictitious; extensively advertised (but never delivered) in a transparent bid to bolster his credibility. After all, who would dare to offer up such substantial rewards – even if they were presumably taken from the six figure sum he’s somehow managed to earn in donations – unless they were absolutely certain that no one could possibly claim them? Or at least I assume that’s the logic behind it. But the truth is that this trick, much like Halbig’s entire carny routine, is as old as time (thanks to Stephen Tobey on Facebook for the great read).
Halbig has offered up one such mythical reward a number of times on his personal Facebook page, placing a $1,000 bounty on pictures from Sandy Hook’s 2012 Veteran’s Day breakfast:
Here’s the full text. I’ve left all spelling and grammatical errors intact because this is the guy that has positioned himself as the lead “investigator” for Sandy Hook “truth”:
I AM STILL WAITING
Why do we have NO takers in Newtown, CT on reward money like a $1000.00 for just one picture showing school busses[sic] at Sandy Hook Elementary School at the end of the school day in 2012-2013 lining up to pick up the children for their ride home?
We should see no less then[sic] 10 school busses[sic] stacked back to back.
Now surely the police officers must have some of those pictures along with about a 1000 parents taken[sic] pictures or shooting a video. This is what we as parents do.
How about a picture in 2012-2013 showing waiting parents lining up to pick up their children at Sandy Hook Elementary School at the end of the school day.
Here is another $1000.00 for such a simple request.
School Busses[sic] and parents waiting in 2012-2013 waiting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School stacked like they were at St Rose of Lima which I have attached a picture for your viewing.
I am so tired of seeing pictures from 2011-2012 school years at Sandy Hook Elementary School showing Veterans eating in the cafeteria on Memorial Day.
Show us the 2012-2013 pictures of Veterans eating in the Sandy Hook Elementary School Cafeteria and here goes another $1000.00 thousand dollars.
Shit, is that it? Maybe this would be easy money. After all, I had already shared three photographs from the 2012 Veterans Day breakfast as part of “Sandy Hook Elementary Was Open, Part Five: Dawn Hochsprung’s Twitter Feed”, but I knew that was likely to be more out there somewhere. After all, the Newtown Bee has regularly reported on the school’s Veterans Day tradition (their 2011 coverage features a photo of victim Jesse Lewis and his grandfather). And it turns out that 2012 was no different. Published in the November 16th, 2012 edition of the paper was the following article:
The article is also available online, via The Newtown Bee’s archives:
Accompanying this article online is a high resolution, full cover version of the photo seen in the article above:
That certainly does appear to be a picture – from November, 2012 – of a veteran eating in the Sandy Hook Elementary cafetorium, doesn’t it?
Now armed with four different photographs from two different sources (Dawn Hochsprung’s Twitter account as well as The Newtown Bee), I had everything I needed to e-mail Wolfgang and claim my reward! And while it took a bit a couple of weeks and a few follow-up e-mails, he did eventually write back:
the picture was taken on 2011 sorry good try
Did you hear that? “Good try”! How polite!
To be honest, this was not entirely unexpected. Deniers have a very long history of claiming that certain evidence – when inaccessible to them – simply does not exist. But when they are confronted with it, they simply dismiss it as fraudulent, and never with any further explanation (this has happened with death certificates, pictures of grieving parents, etc). But I had no intention of letting Wolfgang off that easy, even though he seemed to be admitting that the school was open in 2011 (how else would they host a breakfast for veterans?). So I wrote him back a little later that day:
They very clearly weren’t taken “on” 2011. As you’ve stated, you’ve already seen the 2011 Veterans Day Breakfast photos, so you know that these are different. They depict different people and different decorations. They are corroborated by The Newtown Bee, published in physical form on November 16th, 2012. The Exif data on the photograph, hosted on the Newtown Bee’s site, shows a stamp of November 12th, 2012, 9:21AM.
You, in turn, offer absolutely no proof that they are taken in 2011. None. Because you’re a dishonest man making dishonest claims. You never had any intention of paying out this money to anyone. I knew you would weasel your way out of spending your donation money, I just wasn’t sure which slimy strategy you would employ.
“Slimy strategy” is some fun alliteration, but after sending the e-mail, I realized I probably could have done a better job of shitting all over the guy since he had taken such a cowardly way out. So I quickly fired off a second e-mail:
Still not offering any proof of your claim while denying me the “easy money” you claimed you were willing to give away? Still denying the clear evidence I’ve provided you, such as a scan of the Newtown Bee’s physical copy as well as a link to the matching online piece discussing the 2012 Veterans Day Breakfast? Or the Exif data from the photo hosted by the Newtown Bee (which is included in the article)? Here’s even more evidence that you’re wrong (which you know) and that, if you were an honest man, you’d pay me that $1,000.
Photo #1 shows the 4th grade chorus from 2011 versus the 4th grade chorus from 2012. You may recognize the children in 2012’s 4th grade chorus as some of the children that performed at the Super Bowl (that you have taken to harassing). That alone tells you that this photo is from 2012. Beyond completely different 4th grade children, this picture also shows differences in the stage layout, the flags on the stage, different ribbons tied to the handrail, larger scaffolding, and a piano in place of the laptop seen in 2011. But really, the children are all you need to see. You know those are some of the children that performed at the Super Bowl, looking exactly the same as they did in February.
Photo #2 shows some of the same differences: the different ribbons as well as the different flag configuration. It also shows some new differences, such as a sign that was removed before 2012 and the decorated table sitting upright by the wall, underneath said sign.
Photo #3 shows the configuration of some decorations in 2011. The colors of the stars on the door are (clockwise) red, blue, and white. The colors of the stars on the pillar are (clockwise) white, blue, and red. Now compare that to photo #4, which was taken in 2012.
The stars on the door are (clockwise) white, blue, and (presumably) red. The stars on the pillar are not only smaller in size, but are (clockwise) red, white, and blue. There’s also an eagle above the stars.
I have provided you with all of the evidence anyone (including someone as entrenched as yourself) should need to fully realize that these pictures were taken at different times. You’d have to be a lunatic to deny it at this point.
Be honest with yourself and your supporters. You ran your mouth, made a bet (using donation money), and I rose to the occasion. Again, are you a man of your word or not?
Bam. Now buried in evidence that he is once again talking out of his ass, I figured that there was zero chance he would reply. What would he even have to say? But a day later, he did exactly that:
The Newtown Bee should have these pictures with the exact meta data.
Please provide those for me and I will pay you.
It has to be the Newtown Bee and verifying the Data not just posting 2011 and then 2012
So I reminded Halbig that I had already given him this information:
You’ve ignored every point I’ve made. Obviously the rooms are decorated quite differently and the 4th grade chorus seen in each photo is comprised of different children. You know the children seen in the 2012 photo are the same children from the Super Bowl. I’m not sure why you won’t just cop to it.
I also already told you that the meta data (the Exif data) is available. And I showed you – via my blog post – exactly how to view it. I’ll do it again, with a bit more information.
Here is the article the photograph is taken from:
Take a look at the date on the article: November 16, 2012.
From the article: “At Sandy Hook Elementary School students invited veterans and servicemen to visit the school for a breakfast on Monday, November 12.
Throughout the school’s cafeteria Monday morning, students sat with their esteemed guests to eat and talk, like Chase Kowalski who sat with his “Pop Pop” Anthony Kowalski and Aidan and Ellie Pepko who sat with their great-uncle Chip Pudims.
After the Sandy Hook School breakfast, the guests also visited classrooms with the students. Students also presented poppies to the visitors, and teacher Kate Anderheggen’s fourth grade students sang patriotic songs under the guidance of music teacher Maryrose Kristopik.”
The actual photo from the article can be found at:
Look at the title of that URL: “Photos from the issue dated November 16, 2012”
Now click on the “information” icon at the bottom-right of the photo and you can view the photo’s meta/Exif information. It reads:
DATE TAKEN 2012-11-12 09:21:26
Again, that’s November 12th, 2012. The same date mentioned again and again. The date of the 2012 Veterans Day Breakfast. This same date is advertised in the November 8, 2012 issue of The Sandy Hook Connection as being the date of the breakfast.
“Show your support of our veterans by wearing red, white and blue on Monday, November 12 in celebration of Veterans Day. If your child is hosting a veteran, please remember to arrive by 8 a.m., and please bring breakfast contributions if you signed up to do so!”
Not that I needed any more proof (and again, I want to be clear that you’ve provided nothing that shows these photos are not from November 12th, 2012), but I’ve also included a photo showing the 4th grade children performing for the veterans at the 2012 breakfast are the same 4th grade children that appeared at the Super Bowl. Unless you’re going to make the ludicrous claim that these children not only stayed in the fourth grade two years in a row, but did not change at all physically in a year.
It’s abundantly clear at this point that these photos are from the 2012 Veterans Day Breakfast. There isn’t a shred of evidence to the contrary. Do the right thing and prove that you’re a man of your word.
But Halbig doubled-down on the
Do what I requested get the meta data from the Newtown Bee.
Wolfgang was obviously doing his best to string me along until I ran out of steam and left him alone. He never had any intention of giving me (or anyone else) anything, and I was never under any illusion that he would, but this seemed like an excellent opportunity to show everyone – especially those who keep sending them money, even when they can’t afford to do so – just how dishonest he is. And it also works as a fascinating look at just how inept he is as a researcher. Assuming he wasn’t playing stupid in an attempt to frustrate me (let’s not give him too much credit here), look at how difficult it was for him to locate the photographic metadata on the Newtown Bee’s website. An absolutely baffling number of people (as in more than one) have donated large sums of money to this man, believing he is somehow capable of single-handedly taking on the absolute highest levels of the United States government.
For more on Wolfgang’s wholly self-serving opinion on Exif data, please see “Wolfgang Halbig’s Complicated Relationship With Exif Data”.