Sunday, December 23, 2012
Obama signs executive order to arrest all guns.
Saying he was unwilling to let what he called a “lazy-a** Congress” go on a Kwanzaa break without doing something to end gun violence, President Obama on Friday wrote and signed Executive Order No. 57-ought-nought, demanding that law enforcement officials in all 57 states immediately arrest any and all guns believed to be used in crimes.
“This will get those dang guns off the street,” the president remarked as he signed the order, which was written on a cocktail napkin from the Kappuhualuhannilannamaliki-aha Hotel where he, the family and their entourage of 700 personal assistants, servants, cooks and interior decorators were staying.
Some Republican critics immediately criticized the order in a critical fashion, which other Democratic critics deemed overly critical.
Nonetheless, the critics of the first part noted that the executive order was unclear on whether the president meant to say law enforcement should arrest all “guns” or “gun owners,” primarily due to a large water ring left on the order by the president’s fifth papaya-mango daiquiri of the morning.
“What the ****?” said congressman Paul Ryan, furrowing his Eddie Munster-like brow into a full vampiric scowl.
Democratic Rep. Barney Frank also commented on the new executive order, but no one could understand what he was saying above the wet, flapping sound of his jowls. His office later released a statement in which he wrote, “It’s about time we put the blame where it belongs, on the weapon, not the weapon’s user. People don’t kill people. Guns kill people.”
Former speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, when asked about the president’s executive order, jumped up and down and giggled hysterically for several minutes before saying, “I just bought a gun recycling plant last week. I can’t wait to cash that check!”
Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid’s only comment was “Huh?” as he slipped back into a coma at his desk behind an inbox overflowing with unread budget proposals.
The executive order would also hold bullets and high-capacity magazines accountable as accessories to a crime.
Frank said he was glad that targeting scopes were exempted from criminal responsibility under the new law of the land. “Let’s face it,” Frank said, “targeting scopes are kind of gay. Therefore they must be given special consideration.”
Under the executive order, guns convicted of a crime would be melted down and turned into speculums and other probing devices for use by the TSA at airport inspection checkpoints.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
The Psy-Ops War on Preppers: This Has Become a Two-For-the-Price-of-One Crisis
First of all, where is the headquarters of this “Doomsday Preppers Movement” I’ve been reading about?
And where can I sign up? I didn’t realize there was an organized movement, one deserving of capital letters. Who is the leader of this “movement”? I’d like to meet him (or her) immediately!
The propaganda machine is not only going after guns in the wake of the terrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School – this has become a two-for-the-price-of-one crisis, allowing the government and media to yet again, demonize preppers.
Psychological Warfare: Various techniques are used, by any set of groups, and aimed to influence a target audience’s value systems, belief systems, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. It is used to induce confessions or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the originator’s objectives, and are sometimes combined with black operations or false flag tactics. Target audiences can be governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.The mainstream media began churning out articles about Nancy Lanza, the mother of the shooter, Adam Lanza. When you read the following quotes, ask yourself: “How many of these comments could describe ME?” A few descriptive quotes:
Gee…they say this stuff like it’s a BAD thing.
- Nancy was a member of the Doomsday Preppers movement, which believes people should prepare for end of the world. (Riehl World View)
- According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called ‘prepper’, a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies. ( The UK Independent)
- Reports are starting to emerge of the troubled young man and his unusual upbringing. (Yahoo)
- Dan Holmes, owner of a landscaping firm who worked on the family’s home, said she was an avid gun collector: ‘She told me she would go target shooting with her kids.’ (UK Daily Mail)
- Marsha Lanza described Nancy as ‘self-reliant’.( The UK Independent)
- He was reportedly homeschooled by his mother, a school principal and gun enthusiast, who wasn’t satisfied with the education her son was receiving.. (Yahoo)
- As America searches for answers, investigators are turning towards Nancy Lanza’s supposed identification as a survivalist. (Yahoo)
- Her former sister-in-law Marsha said she had turned her home ‘into a fortress’. (UK Daily Mail)
- Mother of Sandy Hook school gunman Adam Lanza was a ‘prepper’ survivalist preparing for economic and social collapse, say reports. ( The UK Independent)
- Mrs Lanza is thought to have trained her sons, Adam and Ryan to shoot, even taking them to local ranges. ( The UK Independent)
- ‘Nancy had a survivalist philosophy which is why she was stockpiling guns. She had them for defense. She was stockpiling food. She grew up on a farm in New Hampshire. She was skilled with guns. We talked about preppers and preparing for the economy collapsing.’ (UK Daily Mail)
Let’s see.
- Stockpiles (or hoards) food….check.
- Takes children target shooting….check.
- Preparing for economic and/or social collapse….check.
- Serious about home defense….check.
- Home is well-fortified against criminals….check.
- Skilled with weapons….check.
- Survivalist philosophy….check.
- Self-reliant….check.
- Believes that we are capable of educating our children at home….check.
Nancy Lanza’s description could apply to nearly any prepper.
Preppers have been cast in an ugly light for quite some time. We are
painted as camo-clad survivalists, clenching a knife in our teeth while
unloading an automatic weapon into some real or imagined threat. After
our Rambo-esque rampage, we will crouch in the forest by a campfire,
shoveling down an MRE while glaring suspiciously into the dark, a large
Katana hunting knife close at hand with which to dispatch the next
enemy.
We were described last month by emergency manager Valerie Lucus-MacEwen as “socially selfish” – even though the existence of prepared people makes her supplies go further to help the unprepared. In an editorial meant for other emergency managers, Ms. Lucus-MacEwen arrogantly asserted, “You might wonder why someone like me, who has been in the business of encouraging disaster preparedness for a very long time, is so critical of people who are doing just that. It’s because they are being socially selfish – preparing themselves and the hell with everyone else. Instead of spending time and energy making changes that would benefit the larger community, in their very narrow focus of loyalty they are more concerned about themselves.”
The National Geographic program Doomsday Preppers also has had a lot to do with the demonization of preppers – it’s a full-court press propaganda attack against preppers. The program finds the most outrageous examples of preparedness possible and edits to make them look foolish. An article on the American Preppers Network explains the modus operandi:
The show severely skews Preppers in an effort that can be summed up as “making good television”. This is evident not only through viewing the show itself, but through the format they have built the show around. Some highlights of that format include:Do you really believe that each of the families on that show only focus on one particular scenario? No – they are portrayed in a way to marginalize the philosophy of preparedness. We, as preppers, are a threat to the powers that be.
- Featuring one Prepper for 15 minutes only, ensuring that you don’t get too comfortable with them or learn very much about them
- Requiring each guest to pigeon-hole themselves into one thing they are preparing for – almost always a “doomsday” scenario
- Creating conflict and drama via their “experts” who review the segment and then condemn or condone what the Prepper has done – all within the context of the “one thing” they’re preparing for
One participant on the show, David Sarti, learned that his appearance could have serious ramifications. Mr. Sarti “took one for the team” when, only days after the program aired, however, David Sarti was declared “mentally incompetent”….and his guns were seized. All of them. Mr. Sarti, who has no criminal record, is no longer allowed to own guns. He tells his story here.
Apparently, the constitution no longer applies to those who are categorized as preppers.
The accusation of insanity came after he went to see his cardiologist for some chest pains and shortness of breath. So far, it sounds sane and rational to me. The cardiologist, Dr. Andre C. Olivier, whose name and contact information I am delighted to publish, had Mr. Sarti held at the hospital for psychiatric evaluation and broke doctor patient confidentiality by contacting the authorities.Earlier this month, Maryland resident Terry Porter had his home descended upon by 150 armed federal agents and local police officers. The raid also included helicopters, SWAT crews, armored vehicles and excavation equipment.
Then it really went to hell on a greased slide. Mr. Sarti, because of his stay in the psychiatric unit, was then declared “mentally incompetent”. His very large collection of guns was then stolen removed from his possession. He is no longer allowed to own weapons.
His crimes? He was known as a prepper, he was unhappy with the reelection of Barack Obama, and he owned guns. He “openly admitted being a prepper.”
So, why all the vilification? Why are preppers the new “boogeymen”? Why are we being pigeonholed as people who homeschool our kids and turn them into mass murderers of elementary school students?
Simple…because we don’t NEED help. We do not require the assistance of the government. We don’t need to line up for 5 hours to wait for a paltry bottle of water and an MRE after a hurricane strikes. We don’t call 911 and hide in a closet waiting for the police to arrive.
We are the last bastion of independent self-reliant thinkers. And the powers that be are very afraid of those who think for themselves, rather than regurgitating the media-presented party line.
I don’t know why Adam Lanza went on a rampage and killed 26 people last week. But I do know that it wasn’t because his mother was a homeschooling prepper who stored up food and taught him to fire a gun at a paper target.
Person of the Year: President Barack Obama: “Architect of the New America”
One of the most prestigious awards (in addition to a Nobel Prize)
that can be bestowed upon a member of the elite is Time Magazine’s
Person of the Year.
This year, the award goes to the “Architect of a New America”, none other than Barack Obama.
The President joins such notable figures and social architects as Adolf Hitler (1938), Joseph Stalin (1939, 1942), Nikita Khrushchev (1957), Richard Nixon (1971, 1972), Henry Kissinger (1972), The Endangered Earth (1988), Ted Turner (1991), Bill Clinton (1992, 1998), George Bush (2000, 2004), Vladimir Putin (2007), and Ben Bernanke (2009).
Via SGT Report:
This year, the award goes to the “Architect of a New America”, none other than Barack Obama.
The President joins such notable figures and social architects as Adolf Hitler (1938), Joseph Stalin (1939, 1942), Nikita Khrushchev (1957), Richard Nixon (1971, 1972), Henry Kissinger (1972), The Endangered Earth (1988), Ted Turner (1991), Bill Clinton (1992, 1998), George Bush (2000, 2004), Vladimir Putin (2007), and Ben Bernanke (2009).
Via SGT Report:
Kill lists, illegal detention, illegal torture, illegal wiretapping of citizens, endless unconstitutional wars, drone attacks on men, women and children… you’ve got to do a LOT to get this honor. Congrats Obama!
Friday, December 21, 2012
The wretched absurdity of the Benghazi report!!!
Under the cover of the Newtown school shooting, an “independent” five member investigative panel quietly released an unclassified, 39-page report Tuesday night, detailing their findings of the attack that led to the murder of four Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. The report cites five main reasons for the loss of life, all primarily related to inadequate security for U.S. personnel. However, the independent panel found that no “U.S. Government employee engaged in misconduct or willfully ignored his or her responsibilities, and, therefore did not find reasonable cause to believe that an individual breached his or her duty so as to be the subject of a recommendation for disciplinary action.” Stated another way, no one is to blame nor will be held accountable for the murders of Americans Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty, Tyrone Woods, and Ambassador Chris Stevens., so just continue about your business.
The report was released in advance of closed door congressional testimony scheduled for today by two senior panel members, retired Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Admiral Mike Mullen. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also scheduled to testify this week, but has declined to do so as a result of her recent fainting spell. (BULLSHIT) Others are unavailable to testify or have not been asked, which is a common tactic when the outcome of an investigation is fixed from the beginning, and this, based on an extensive review of all available evidence, most certainly was.
2012 Game show panel: To Tell The Truth
It is an interesting bit of trivia, perhaps, that the popular television game show To Tell the Truth premiered exactly 56 years to the day that the Benghazi report was released. The objective of the 2012 real world panel appears to be the antithesis of former game show, as ferreting out the truth did not appear to be the panel’s objective.
The panel report offers nothing more than obligatory eye candy in the form of a stinging rebuke of State Department management and leadership failures that led to the murder of four Americans. The panel deliberately convolutes the pertinent issues with unrelated historical accounts of security issues in Libya dating back to 1967, giving the reader a sense of thoroughness while leaving the main issues untouched by design.
Ironically, the report opens with a 1905 quote from George Santayanna: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Included perhaps to add legitimacy and a veneer of integrity to an investigative report unworthy of such a definition, it is an insult to those aware of the actual events leading up to the murderous attacks of 9/11.
To understand how the truth behind the murders and the events of the attack is being buried amid familiar terms and talking points suitable for both political parties and their spokespeople, it is vital to understand the origin and makeup of the “independent” panel. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton convened the Accountability Review Board (ARB) in the wake of the attacks, quietly appointing retired Ambassador Thomas Pickering to chair and direct the panel. His appointment unceremoniously appeared in the October 4, 2012 edition of the Federal Register.
As noted in a previous report by this author, Thomas Pickering is an obvious choice to direct an investigation that could have any negative implications to Iran or this administration’s associations with the Muslim Brotherhood. Pickering is an advisory board member of the pro-Iranian organization known as the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), and co-chairman of the board of directors of the International Crisis Group (ICG), whose executive committee includes the infamous George Soros. Pickering is also vice-chairman of Hills & Co., global consultants founded in 1993 by CFR and Trilateral Commission member Carla Anderson Hills.
The significance of Pickering’s appointment cannot be overstated or underestimated considering that the trail of blood from four Americans leads directly to Ansar al Sharia, a terrorist group funded by Iran. Who better to redirect or cover up the operational conspiracy that exists between Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and that Muslim Brotherhood that exists at the core of the 9/11 attack? Pickering is the obvious choice.
From the untouched to the absurd
Left untouched by the Pickering panel are the intrinsically sinister machinations of Obama, Jarrett and Clinton, as they as are methodically taking us to the brink of a new war in Syria through their weapons running operations in Benghazi. The report intentionally offered only a very narrow view of the events in Benghazi, limiting their scope to the already exposed security deficiencies that were secondary to the redefined Benghazi “consulate.” Using this tactic effectively diverts attention away from the real issue and thus, the actual cause for the attack.
Beyond the narrow focus of the security issues and the subsequent inconsequential wrist slap, the investigative panel descends further into the abyss of absurdity and insult by incredibly asserting that everything possible had been done to rescue and save our Ambassador and Sean Smith, and further asserted that “the interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there was simply not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
That finding alone should alarm every thinking American based on open source intelligence and what is known, as well as what has yet to be disclosed. Only if this report was written with the blood of the dead Americans could it be more insulting to families of the dead and to the intelligence of the American public.
Perhaps Pickering and his cadre of co-conspirators would like to disclose to the American people the strange odyssey of a certain C-130 aircraft that left Croatia to Libya to provide assistance to the Americans under siege at the onset of the attack. The portal-to-portal flight time is about four hours, yet it did not officially “appear” on site for 23 hours. Perhaps it’s time to address the fact that the lie is different at every level, and for Pickering to stop being a firewall between his bosses and the truth owed to every American, and particularly to the families of those who were murdered.
It’s time to ask whether the crew of that C-130 was ever identified and interviewed. It’s time to locate and ask the personnel on board that aircraft how long it was, after they changed from their military uniforms into their street clothes to enact a rescue, were they forced to wait while the embattled Americans endured the attack and met their deaths. Oh yes, there is information known and crying out to be made public despite the contempt for the truth and equally important, the contempt for the American people by Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton and Valerie Jarrett.
Four Americans were murdered in Benghazi. Over forty thousand are dead in Syria. Soon, it will be four million dead as a result of the hidden agenda of our elected leaders, the complicity of a corrupt media, and the complacency of a brainwashed public. Today we cry over the deaths in Newtown, but tomorrow, our sobs will be for the masses.
NRA’s wrongheaded response to Sandy Hook violence.
Wayne LaPierre of the NRA has called for armed cops to be placed in every school in America in response to the shooting of children by a deranged manic last week in Connecticut. He also suggested a national database cataloging the mentally ill.
“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre during a news conference today.
“How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame from a national media machine that rewards them with wall-to-wall attention and a sense of identity that they crave, while provoking others to try to make their mark,” LaPierre said. “A dozen more killers, a hundred more? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation’s refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?”
LaPierre also announced a NRA model security program of armed volunteers to guard schools. He said Rep. Asa Hutchison, R-Ark., will lead the program for the lobbying organization.
While the idea of armed citizen volunteers protecting schools is reasonable, the call for adding more police is not. The presence of police in public schools has created a number of problems – from tasering and handcuffing students to shooting them to death – in addition to fostering a prison-like environment.
As for creating a government database of people suffering from mental illness and then presumably denying them Second Amendment rights, this is a dangerous idea begging for government abuse. If the state is allowed to determine what mental illness is and who suffers from it, large numbers of people will undoubtedly have their right to own firearms denied (like veterans suffering from PTSD are denied their rights).
It looks like the NRA is merely passing the buck on this issue and once again relying on government to devise solutions.
The solution to public school violence is really quite simple – citizens must be fully empowered to exercise the right to self-protection and the protection of their families (defense is a natural right that has nothing to do with the real reason the Second Amendment was established). This right to self-protection cannot be denied by “gun free zones” that are in essence self-defense free zones.
If the government continues to insist that schools remain self-defense free zones and responds to inevitable shooting incidents by employing more police (or as Sen. Boxer has proposed, sending in the National Guard), citizens will have no choice but to remove their children from public schools.
“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre during a news conference today.
“How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame from a national media machine that rewards them with wall-to-wall attention and a sense of identity that they crave, while provoking others to try to make their mark,” LaPierre said. “A dozen more killers, a hundred more? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation’s refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?”
LaPierre also announced a NRA model security program of armed volunteers to guard schools. He said Rep. Asa Hutchison, R-Ark., will lead the program for the lobbying organization.
While the idea of armed citizen volunteers protecting schools is reasonable, the call for adding more police is not. The presence of police in public schools has created a number of problems – from tasering and handcuffing students to shooting them to death – in addition to fostering a prison-like environment.
As for creating a government database of people suffering from mental illness and then presumably denying them Second Amendment rights, this is a dangerous idea begging for government abuse. If the state is allowed to determine what mental illness is and who suffers from it, large numbers of people will undoubtedly have their right to own firearms denied (like veterans suffering from PTSD are denied their rights).
It looks like the NRA is merely passing the buck on this issue and once again relying on government to devise solutions.
The solution to public school violence is really quite simple – citizens must be fully empowered to exercise the right to self-protection and the protection of their families (defense is a natural right that has nothing to do with the real reason the Second Amendment was established). This right to self-protection cannot be denied by “gun free zones” that are in essence self-defense free zones.
If the government continues to insist that schools remain self-defense free zones and responds to inevitable shooting incidents by employing more police (or as Sen. Boxer has proposed, sending in the National Guard), citizens will have no choice but to remove their children from public schools.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Agenda Driven News
by:
I have known for a long time that US news is agenda-driven. Tonight (December 18) I was made aware of the extent to which agenda-driven US news drives the news of the rest of the world.
For reasons unbeknownst to me, Russia Today Moscow requested a live TV interview via Skype about the Newtown, Connecticut, school shootings that killed 20 young children and several adults. I was interested to know what was Moscow’s interest in the shootings, and I agreed to the interview.
I was surprised to see that RT Moscow’s interest was to spread the official US story of the shootings and to ask me if I thought “assault weapons” would be banned as a consequence.
Many things can be an assault weapon. A baseball bat, a knife, a fist, a foot, a single shot .22 rifle, a double-barrel shotgun, a fireplace poker, a six-shot revolver, a brick, a sword, a bow and arrow, a lance. A person can add many items to this short list.
Gun-control advocates have defined “assault weapon” to be a semi-automatic civilian version of military weapons, such as AR-15, the civilian version of the military M-16, and AK-47. During the Clinton administration the civilian version of these weapons was not permitted to have various harmless features because the features made the rifles have a military appearance, and the weapons were restricted to magazines that held no more than ten rounds.
Today 20 and 30 round magazines are available. For a professional, the capacity of the magazines is immaterial. With experience a person can change clips in a second. A button is pushed, the clip drops out and a new one is inserted. For reasons hard to follow, gun control advocates think that a ten-round clip turns an “assault weapon” into something else.
I told RT Moscow that the United States was the most compete police state in human history. Thanks to modern technology, Washington is able to spy on its subjects far beyond the capabilities of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler. Even George Orwell’s imagination in his dystopian novel, 1984, has been surpassed by Washington’s current practice. The “war on terror” is the excuse for the American Police State.
A police state, I said, was inconsistent with an armed population, and as all other constitutional amendments have fallen, the sole remaining amendment, the Second Amendment, will not survive much longer.
But why RT Moscow’s focus on “assault weapons”? The accused, Adam Lanza, was immediately declared guilty. According to the Associated Press, the Newtown, Connecticut medical examiner, Dr H. Wayne Carver said that “all the victims of the Connecticut elementary school shooting were killed up close by multiple rifle shots.” http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/183651631.html
Yet Fox News http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/20346133/reports-of-multiple-dead-including-1-child-from-ct-elementary-school-shooting reports that “A CNN reporter said police recovered three weapons at the scene: a Glock and a Sig-Sauer, which are handguns, as well as a .223 Bushmaster rifle. The rifle was in the back seat of the car the gunman drove to the school, the handguns were inside the school.”
The same Fox News report says: “Security measures implemented this year at Sandy Hook [the school] kept doors locked during class hours, and people have to be buzzed in before entering. There is a camera to view whoever enters the building.” If this report is correct, how did an armed Lanza gain entry to the school?
I tried to point out to RT Moscow that these news reports indicate that the accused dead gunman, whom no one can interrogate, if he is indeed the culprit, killed the children with handguns, not with an “assault rifle” left in the car, but that the medical examiner said the children were killed with rifle shots.
The discrepancy is obvious. Either the news reports are incorrect, the medical examiner is wrong, or someone other than Adam Lanza shot the children.
This was too much for RT Moscow’s news anchor. She cut me off with her statement that the children were dead by whatever gun. Yet, the focus of the program was on “assault rifles.” This focus was reinforced when I was asked to stay online for a post-interview question.
The question from RT Moscow was whether I thought assault weapons would be banned. I answered that I thought all guns would be banned. I had already told the TV anchor that I thought that all guns would be taken away from US subjects, but that I doubted the efficacy of the ban. I told the news anchor that during the early part of the 20th century, the US, in all its wisdom, had a ban on alcohol, but alcohol was everywhere available. The alcohol ban was the origin of the crime syndicates’ fortunes. Today we have the drug ban, going back decades. The result is that drugs are everywhere, and drug syndicates are making billions. It will not be much different with a gun ban. England has a gun ban, but criminals have guns, and today the formerly unarmed British police are heavily armed. When I lived in England, guns were not banned and the police carried nightsticks, not firearms.
The focus on “assault weapons” is puzzling for another reason. According to news reports Lanza had a personality or mental disorder, or perhaps he was just different.
Regardless, he was on medication. So does the blame lie with guns or with medication?
As the agenda is to ban guns, the blame is placed on guns.
In the previous mass shooting at the Colorado movie theater, eyewitness accounts differed from the official account, and according to news accounts the suspect was involved with the government in some sort of mind control experiments and was found after the shooting sitting in a car in the movie theater parking lot.
Similarly, the Connecticut school shooting has puzzling aspects. In the real time report to the police, a teacher says that she saw “two shadows running past the gym.” http://sgtreport.com/2012/12/so-many-questions-too-few-answers-was-the-sandy-hook-massacre-an-organzied-false-flag-operation/ The police radio recording also reports two men in a van at the school stopped and detained, and various news sources report that the police arrested a man in the nearby woods. The man says, “I didn’t do it,” but how would a man out in the woods know what had just happened? There are no TVs to watch in the woods; yet, the man denied doing the shooting. Very strange.
What often happens is that there are a number of initial false reports, such as in the Connecticut case the report that Lanza’s mother was a teacher at the school and was killed at the school, that Lanza had also killed his father, and that Lanza’s brother might have been involved. Any discrepancies in the official story then get thrown out with the false reports. As the media simply goes along with the official story and does not investigate, it is impossible to know what really happened. People just accept the official story.
It seems odd, however, that RT Moscow would uncritically follow the US media in reporting the official story after experiencing, for example, the US media’s intentional misreporting of the Georgian-Russian war, which was started by the former Soviet republic of Georgia but blamed on Russia. Does RT Moscow really believe the US media that the US missile bases surrounding Russia are directed at Iran?
Americans have been well armed for several centuries, but “gun violence” is new. Why?
Are there more disturbed people? More medicated people? Have Americans lost self-control, their moral conscience? Are Americans being molded by violent movies and video games and by eleven years of their government’s slaughter of other peoples? Have Americans lost empathy for others?
Tom McNamara, a lecturer at the French National Military Academy, asks: “Do Arabs Cry For Their Children Too?” http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/do-arabs-cry-for-their-children-too/print
The Connecticut school shooting is a tragedy in more ways than one. Children lost their lives, families lost their children, and the tragedy is being used to disarm Americans faced with a police state growing in power and menace.
I have known for a long time that US news is agenda-driven. Tonight (December 18) I was made aware of the extent to which agenda-driven US news drives the news of the rest of the world.
For reasons unbeknownst to me, Russia Today Moscow requested a live TV interview via Skype about the Newtown, Connecticut, school shootings that killed 20 young children and several adults. I was interested to know what was Moscow’s interest in the shootings, and I agreed to the interview.
I was surprised to see that RT Moscow’s interest was to spread the official US story of the shootings and to ask me if I thought “assault weapons” would be banned as a consequence.
Many things can be an assault weapon. A baseball bat, a knife, a fist, a foot, a single shot .22 rifle, a double-barrel shotgun, a fireplace poker, a six-shot revolver, a brick, a sword, a bow and arrow, a lance. A person can add many items to this short list.
Gun-control advocates have defined “assault weapon” to be a semi-automatic civilian version of military weapons, such as AR-15, the civilian version of the military M-16, and AK-47. During the Clinton administration the civilian version of these weapons was not permitted to have various harmless features because the features made the rifles have a military appearance, and the weapons were restricted to magazines that held no more than ten rounds.
Today 20 and 30 round magazines are available. For a professional, the capacity of the magazines is immaterial. With experience a person can change clips in a second. A button is pushed, the clip drops out and a new one is inserted. For reasons hard to follow, gun control advocates think that a ten-round clip turns an “assault weapon” into something else.
I told RT Moscow that the United States was the most compete police state in human history. Thanks to modern technology, Washington is able to spy on its subjects far beyond the capabilities of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler. Even George Orwell’s imagination in his dystopian novel, 1984, has been surpassed by Washington’s current practice. The “war on terror” is the excuse for the American Police State.
A police state, I said, was inconsistent with an armed population, and as all other constitutional amendments have fallen, the sole remaining amendment, the Second Amendment, will not survive much longer.
But why RT Moscow’s focus on “assault weapons”? The accused, Adam Lanza, was immediately declared guilty. According to the Associated Press, the Newtown, Connecticut medical examiner, Dr H. Wayne Carver said that “all the victims of the Connecticut elementary school shooting were killed up close by multiple rifle shots.” http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/183651631.html
Yet Fox News http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/20346133/reports-of-multiple-dead-including-1-child-from-ct-elementary-school-shooting reports that “A CNN reporter said police recovered three weapons at the scene: a Glock and a Sig-Sauer, which are handguns, as well as a .223 Bushmaster rifle. The rifle was in the back seat of the car the gunman drove to the school, the handguns were inside the school.”
The same Fox News report says: “Security measures implemented this year at Sandy Hook [the school] kept doors locked during class hours, and people have to be buzzed in before entering. There is a camera to view whoever enters the building.” If this report is correct, how did an armed Lanza gain entry to the school?
I tried to point out to RT Moscow that these news reports indicate that the accused dead gunman, whom no one can interrogate, if he is indeed the culprit, killed the children with handguns, not with an “assault rifle” left in the car, but that the medical examiner said the children were killed with rifle shots.
The discrepancy is obvious. Either the news reports are incorrect, the medical examiner is wrong, or someone other than Adam Lanza shot the children.
This was too much for RT Moscow’s news anchor. She cut me off with her statement that the children were dead by whatever gun. Yet, the focus of the program was on “assault rifles.” This focus was reinforced when I was asked to stay online for a post-interview question.
The question from RT Moscow was whether I thought assault weapons would be banned. I answered that I thought all guns would be banned. I had already told the TV anchor that I thought that all guns would be taken away from US subjects, but that I doubted the efficacy of the ban. I told the news anchor that during the early part of the 20th century, the US, in all its wisdom, had a ban on alcohol, but alcohol was everywhere available. The alcohol ban was the origin of the crime syndicates’ fortunes. Today we have the drug ban, going back decades. The result is that drugs are everywhere, and drug syndicates are making billions. It will not be much different with a gun ban. England has a gun ban, but criminals have guns, and today the formerly unarmed British police are heavily armed. When I lived in England, guns were not banned and the police carried nightsticks, not firearms.
The focus on “assault weapons” is puzzling for another reason. According to news reports Lanza had a personality or mental disorder, or perhaps he was just different.
Regardless, he was on medication. So does the blame lie with guns or with medication?
As the agenda is to ban guns, the blame is placed on guns.
In the previous mass shooting at the Colorado movie theater, eyewitness accounts differed from the official account, and according to news accounts the suspect was involved with the government in some sort of mind control experiments and was found after the shooting sitting in a car in the movie theater parking lot.
Similarly, the Connecticut school shooting has puzzling aspects. In the real time report to the police, a teacher says that she saw “two shadows running past the gym.” http://sgtreport.com/2012/12/so-many-questions-too-few-answers-was-the-sandy-hook-massacre-an-organzied-false-flag-operation/ The police radio recording also reports two men in a van at the school stopped and detained, and various news sources report that the police arrested a man in the nearby woods. The man says, “I didn’t do it,” but how would a man out in the woods know what had just happened? There are no TVs to watch in the woods; yet, the man denied doing the shooting. Very strange.
What often happens is that there are a number of initial false reports, such as in the Connecticut case the report that Lanza’s mother was a teacher at the school and was killed at the school, that Lanza had also killed his father, and that Lanza’s brother might have been involved. Any discrepancies in the official story then get thrown out with the false reports. As the media simply goes along with the official story and does not investigate, it is impossible to know what really happened. People just accept the official story.
It seems odd, however, that RT Moscow would uncritically follow the US media in reporting the official story after experiencing, for example, the US media’s intentional misreporting of the Georgian-Russian war, which was started by the former Soviet republic of Georgia but blamed on Russia. Does RT Moscow really believe the US media that the US missile bases surrounding Russia are directed at Iran?
Americans have been well armed for several centuries, but “gun violence” is new. Why?
Are there more disturbed people? More medicated people? Have Americans lost self-control, their moral conscience? Are Americans being molded by violent movies and video games and by eleven years of their government’s slaughter of other peoples? Have Americans lost empathy for others?
Tom McNamara, a lecturer at the French National Military Academy, asks: “Do Arabs Cry For Their Children Too?” http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/do-arabs-cry-for-their-children-too/print
The Connecticut school shooting is a tragedy in more ways than one. Children lost their lives, families lost their children, and the tragedy is being used to disarm Americans faced with a police state growing in power and menace.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Facebook Suspends Account For Questioning Official Narrative on Shooting
Despite the fact that the mainstream media got key facts wrong in early reporting.
Facebook is suspending user accounts that question the official narrative behind the Sandy Hook school massacre, following a warning by Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance that “misinformation” posted on social media sites could result in prosecution.
An image posted in the aftermath of the shootings that questioned whether “a clumsy 20-year-old autistic kid” could have pulled off the murders of 26 people was deleted and the user’s account hit with a three day suspension.
“I was informed the reason for this punishment was the result of a meme I had shared,” writes the editor of SecretsOfTheFed.com. “Facebook told me it “…violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities”. I was further warned that “If you continue to abuse Facebook’s features, your account could be permanently disabled.”
On Saturday, Connecticut state police warned that people posting “misinformation” on social media websites would be “investigated and prosecuted.”
However, this threat could apply to the vast majority of the mainstream media, who in their haste to get out ahead of the story reported numerous details that soon turned out to be completely incorrect.
- It was initially reported that Adam Lanza’s mother, the first victim of the rampage, was a teacher at the school, which was not true.
- It was initially reported that Lanza had also killed his father, which was not true.
- It was initially reported that the culprit behind the massacre was Ryan Lanza, Adam Lanza’s brother, which was not true.
- Initial reports that a “second gunman” arrested in the woods behind the school was involved in the massacre were later dropped without explanation.
Given that most of the “misinformation” about the shooting came from corporate media sources, the fact that Facebook is punishing users for asking questions about the proper sequence of events – essentially labeling such activity a thought crime – is a worrying development.
As we have previously highlighted, Facebook occasionally deletes images and posts that it claims violate “Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities,” yet constitute little more than political conjecture or a healthy skepticism of official narratives on current events.
In September 2011, Infowars reporter Darrin McBreen was told by Facebook staff not to voice his political opinion on the social networking website.
Responding to comments McBreen had made about off-grid preppers being treated as criminals, the “Facebook Team” wrote, “Be careful making about making political statements on facebook,” adding, “Facebook is about building relationships not a platform for your political viewpoint. Don’t antagonize your base. Be careful and congnizat (sic) of what you are preaching.”
Facebook is suspending user accounts that question the official narrative behind the Sandy Hook school massacre, following a warning by Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance that “misinformation” posted on social media sites could result in prosecution.
An image posted in the aftermath of the shootings that questioned whether “a clumsy 20-year-old autistic kid” could have pulled off the murders of 26 people was deleted and the user’s account hit with a three day suspension.
“I was informed the reason for this punishment was the result of a meme I had shared,” writes the editor of SecretsOfTheFed.com. “Facebook told me it “…violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities”. I was further warned that “If you continue to abuse Facebook’s features, your account could be permanently disabled.”
On Saturday, Connecticut state police warned that people posting “misinformation” on social media websites would be “investigated and prosecuted.”
However, this threat could apply to the vast majority of the mainstream media, who in their haste to get out ahead of the story reported numerous details that soon turned out to be completely incorrect.
- It was initially reported that Adam Lanza’s mother, the first victim of the rampage, was a teacher at the school, which was not true.
- It was initially reported that Lanza had also killed his father, which was not true.
- It was initially reported that the culprit behind the massacre was Ryan Lanza, Adam Lanza’s brother, which was not true.
- Initial reports that a “second gunman” arrested in the woods behind the school was involved in the massacre were later dropped without explanation.
Given that most of the “misinformation” about the shooting came from corporate media sources, the fact that Facebook is punishing users for asking questions about the proper sequence of events – essentially labeling such activity a thought crime – is a worrying development.
As we have previously highlighted, Facebook occasionally deletes images and posts that it claims violate “Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities,” yet constitute little more than political conjecture or a healthy skepticism of official narratives on current events.
In September 2011, Infowars reporter Darrin McBreen was told by Facebook staff not to voice his political opinion on the social networking website.
Responding to comments McBreen had made about off-grid preppers being treated as criminals, the “Facebook Team” wrote, “Be careful making about making political statements on facebook,” adding, “Facebook is about building relationships not a platform for your political viewpoint. Don’t antagonize your base. Be careful and congnizat (sic) of what you are preaching.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)