From Redsilverj. The motives behind this alleged shooting:
And check out this article over at Blacklisted News:
Here we go again. See DAHBOO777’s video embedded below, which includes this statement from a KTLA report, “The San Bernardino PD’s SWAT team was training nearby…They were already suited up and ‘ready to roll.'”
My local news announced an interview with an eyewitness, the father of a man inside one of the buildings when the alleged shooting occurred. The only thing the man said was that the government must do something to stop mass shootings. Although the report was aired at least five hours after the event, no one knew the number of casualties.
The Wall Street Journal has this headline: In Grim Ritual, Barack Obama Again Calls for Stricter Gun Control After Mass Shooting. When are people going to wake up to the fact that these events are not real?
From Paul Joseph Watson:
From the Free Thought Project:
As of February 15, only a month and a half into 2015, there has been at least 136 individuals killed by police in the United States since the first of the year.
As the author suggests, let these facts sink in.
The article cites examples of countries without murderous cops, such as Canada (14 killed by cops in 2014), England (1 killed in 2014, none in 2013), and Germany (zero killed by cops 2013-2014). The first thing that comes to mind is that the countries listed have strict gun control laws. Are the powers that be allowing, or perhaps encouraging, cops to kill U.S. citizens in a final push to disarm us?
And gun-grabbers, don’t try to tell the rest of us that the cops will stop killing citizens if the populace were disarmed. Do you really believe they would? Will handing over our guns inspire local police forces to melt down their assault weapons and tanks? And what about criminals, who will still have guns? Where do you get the moral authority to take away my means of self defense?
Back to the article:
So far this year all cop killers have been other cops. This year the police seem to be far more likely to die as a result of police brutality than at the hand of a violent suspect.
Just last week an officer responding to a domestic disturbance at a North Texas residence, shot and killed off-duty sheriff’s deputy Larry Hostetter, 41, shortly after midnight.
At the end of January, we also reported on a Yonkers police officer who shot a suicidal officer from another precinct, claiming he feared for his safety.
You don’t hear any of this on mainstream news. Here’s more of what they don’t tell us:
According to the Officer Down Memorial Page, the pro-police site that tracks every officer death, not a single police officer has been killed by a suspect so far this year.
Line of Duty Deaths: 14
How did the 14 die?
Automobile accident: 5
Heart attack: 4
Struck by vehicle: 2
Vehicle pursuit: 1
9/11 related illness: 1
Gunfire (Accidental): 1
In fact, being a police officer isn’t even close to being in the top 10 most dangerous jobs in this country. According to the 2013 report by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics on work-related fatal injuries, “Police and sheriff’s patrol deputies” ranked as the 41st most dangerous occupation.
Also, according to an FBI report, Americans are less violent than ever; its the police who have been increasingly violent.
Free Thought Project’s conclusion:
As Liberation News pointed out, a vast majority of those killed by the police in 2015 have again been young African Americans and Latinos. The two youngest were both 17-years-old, Kristiana Coignard of Texas and Jessica Hernandez of Colorado. The oldest was 87-year-old Lewis Becker from rural upstate New York.
Officers who cannot bring 17-year-old girls or 87-year-old men into custody safely have absolutely no business “protecting and serving” anyone. A person who cannot control a situation with a 90 pound high school girl or an elderly gentleman, and “fear for their life” so severely that they need to pull a trigger, is not a hero, they’re a coward.
These are just excerpts from the article, which can be found at Free Thought Project. It includes more info and some good links.
Have you noticed how many shootings are being reported lately? Did you know there is a UN Arms Trade Treaty that will take effect this Christmas Eve? From Wikipedia:
The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is a multilateral treaty which has not entered into force that regulates the international trade in conventional weapons…
On 2 April 2013, the UN General Assembly adopted the ATT. The treaty has been signed by 122 states and has been ratified by 54. It will enter into force on 24 December 2014, having been ratified or acceded to by the requisite 50 states.
According to Wikipedia:
Conventional weapons include small arms and light weapons, sea and land mines, as well as (non-weapons of mass destruction) bombs, shells, rockets, missiles, and cluster munitions. These weapons use explosive material based on chemical energy, as opposed to nuclear energy in nuclear weapons.
The usurpation of our rights is always explained in a way that makes it sound like a good idea. The Wikipedia article quotes Snopes:
The Arms Trade Treaty obligates member states to monitor arms exports and ensure that weapons don’t cross existing arms embargoes or end up being used for human-rights abuses, including terrorism. Member states, with the assistance of the U.N., will put into place enforceable, standardized arms import and export regulations (much like those that already exist in the U.S.) and be expected to track the destination of exports to ensure they don’t end up in the wrong hands. Ideally, that means limiting the inflow of deadly weapons into places like Syria.
Isn’t that nice? Explosives won’t be going to places like Syria. However, from the treaty’s opponents:
Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That’s a bald-faced lie. For example, the most recent draft treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the ‘end user’ of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an ‘end user’ and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S.
Maybe the treaty isn’t so nice. From Investors.com:
The Orwellian-named United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, which has disarmed none of the world’s tyrants or terrorists, has announced on its website that the ATT will take effect on Christmas Eve, a lump of coal in the stockings of anyone who believes, as our Founding Fathers did when they wrote the Second Amendment, that guns in the hands of private citizens are the best defense against predators, terrorists and, yes, tyrannical governments.
The Obama administration and its allies at the state and local level have gone after our Second Amendment gun rights through what they call “common-sense restrictions,” and it wouldn’t be beyond this president to seek to implement the treaty’s gun-control provisions with his phone and pen as he’s done with climate change.
Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 of the ATT requires that all states participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”
Article 12 mandates that the list include the “quantity, value, model/type” as well as the identity of the “end users” of each weapon covered under the ATT.
As the Heritage Foundation notes, imported firearms, considered part of the “arms trade” to be regulated, constitute about 35% of the new firearms market in the U.S. This would subject private American gun owners to the provisions of the treaty, ratified or not.
A President with a pen, phone, and no respect for the Constitution is a dangerous thing. Add to the pen and phone the mainstream media. Are there really more shootings taking place? Or are we being programmed to insist upon having personal firearms taken away? Here are some quotes. You decide:
“The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.”
— George Orwell
“All news is lies and all propaganda is disguised as news.”
— Willy Munzenberg, Stalin’s propaganda chief
“The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”
— William Colby, former CIA director
“The media is a Counter-Intelligence organisation. The media backs every war. The role of the media and embedded historians is to surround the truth with a bodyguard of lies. “
— Greg Hallett
I’ve noticed that. What does that mean to someone who doesn’t believe in coincidences? The quote is from a CNN anti-gun propaganda piece.
The headline: “Navy Yard shooting: AR-15, back in the news — briefly”. Yes, briefly, because they’ve found that one wasn’t actually used in the shooting.
From the article:
The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning’s shootings….
Regardless, the massacre pushed the AR-15 back into the gun-control debate. The weapon has been used in several other rampages that shocked the nation:
— Sandy Hook: Adam Lanza killed 26 people at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, with an AR-15 in December 2012.
— Aurora: Police say James Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58 using an AR-15 rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and at least one of two .40-caliber handguns police recovered at the scene.
— Portland: Jacob Tyler Roberts stole an AR-15 and killed two people in a mall food court in December 2012.
— Santa Monica: John Zawahri allegedly pieced together an AR-15-type gun and went on a rampage that started at his father’s home and ended at Santa Monica College in June. Five people were killed.
A questionable incident happened in my small city not long ago, a podunk place with a SWAT team, a county sheriff initially appointed by the governor, and a county sheriff’s department with a $91 million budget. The incident was a domestic disturbance call that required the SWAT team and the death of a man allegedly in possession of an AK-47. The incident somehow warranted the unexpected spectacle of a press conference, during which a testy reporter demanded to know the dangers associated with the deceased man’s weapons. The sheriff responded that weapons themselves aren’t dangerous, but dangerous in the hands of someone mentally unstable. That sounds a lot like the assertions being made by Fox News. Another coincidence?
Anyway, isn’t it funny how CNN had to run this article on the AR-15 even when the facts of the Navy Yard story didn’t justify its publication? What dolts.
The article continues:
“Almost every mass shooting involves an AR-15 assault rifle,” Staff Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford told CNN’s Piers Morgan Monday night.
“It’s the preferred mass shooter’s weapon of choice,” added Lunsford, who was wounded by Maj. Nidal Hasan during the Ft. Hood shooting in 2009.
“But I don’t see a logical reason why any civilian needs to have one of these killing machines.”
Perhaps to defend ourselves from crazed killers who have the weapons they don’t want us to have?
Making a point for “pro-gun activist” Ben Ferguson:
Had the contractor and civilians working in the Navy Yard been armed, they could have gunned down the gunman and stopped the shooting quickly.
From what I’ve heard, no personnel but law enforcement can carry guns in the Navy Yard. See what that creates? Those workers were sitting ducks, having to cower until someone authorized to carry a weapon came to rescue them. Gun-grabbers should be hanging their heads in shame for the tragedies they’ve caused.
Ferguson was being interviewed by Piers Morgan. Morgan’s inane response:
“I want the day to come where we don’t have to have this ridiculous debate time and again in America,” he said in frustration. “I just cannot have this debate anymore. It is ridiculous.”
I’d say the debate was stopped. Ferguson was right and Morgan’s just stupid. He’s on the wrong side of the issue and has no facts to back up his position. My advice for ending the ridiculous debate is to have all those who don’t have enough sense to understand that more guns means less crime, which has been proven again and again, to get off the air, shut up, and let people have their weapons, as our Constitution provides.
The article subsequently gives a history of the AR-15 and then a few obtuse quotes from gun-grabbing politicians. What a waste of space.
Nevertheless, the Navy Yard shooting was another opportunity for the gun-grabbers to point their fingers at assault weapons, even though none were used.
In the wake of the shooting at the Navy Yard, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president is implementing executive actions and reiterated his commitment to strengthening gun laws, including expanding background checks to sales online and at gun shows.
“The president supports, as do an overwhelming majority of Americans, common-sense measures to reduce gun violence,” Carney said.
Apparently, this was The 16th American Mass Shooting Since Obama Became President. Wow, what a coincidence. Makes me think it’s not the guns. Seems more likely it’s him.
The president isn’t the only one politicizing the shooting:
“When will enough be enough?” Feinstein asked. “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.”
Never thought I’d agree with the gun-grabbing Dianne Feinstein. Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and allow law-abiding citizens, including those who work on military bases, to carry guns. As for the rest of us, we need to vote out gun-grabbing, tyrannical, greedy politicians in order to stop this endless loss of life.
While watching coverage of the Navy Yard shooting on Fox News, the never-ending parade of talking head “experts” agreed that the problem was a faulty background check. Many brought up Edward Snowden as another example of this.
One stated that it is impossible to properly “vet” the 4 million contractors that need security clearance. However, if out of 4 millions contractors one (Snowden) allegedly leaked and two (Alexis and Hasan) allegedly shot co-workers, that doesn’t seem like much of a problem.
Nevertheless, this is what they’re harping on and one of them blamed HIPAA, the health care privacy act, which “protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information.” [It’s enforced by the Office of Civil Rights. Who knew?] Does the same government that burdened doctors, their staff, and patients/consumers with so much excess paperwork related to this law now want to repeal it?
In addition, there’s the coincidence that late last week we learned, Government Seeking Inclusion of ‘Social and Behavioral’ Data in Health Records:
According to a solicitation posted by the Department of Health and Human Services on Sept. 4, the CMS is commissioning the National Academy of Sciences to study how best to add social and behavioral factors to electronic health record reporting.
The government that accidentally emailed 2,400 social security numbers now wants to digitally store our behavioral data.
For what it’s worth, InfoWars is reporting the same thing about the Navy Yard shooter and his security clearance, albeit without the editorializing done on Fox News:
The suspected Navy Yard gunman shot dead by cops earlier today had a secret government clearance despite the fact he was arrested in Seattle in 2004 after shooting out the tires of a car during an angry “blackout.”
He was also charged in a similar incident. However, Alexis wasn’t prosecuted for either, a fact the InfoWars article doesn’t mention.
Nevertheless, the fact that the charges would not have been enough to cause revocation of his security clearance appears to have become the basis for an argument for more people having more access to individuals’ behavioral records. In other words, it’s no longer enough for the courts to decide guilt or innocence; rather someone with access to the government’s database of behavioral records will decide whether or not they like the way you act.
Who is going to have access to your private behavioral data? From what the talking heads have been saying, most background checks are performed by government contractors.
There has been little attention given to the Santa Monica shooting. Perhaps there is nothing more to learn from these events. Nevertheless, here are some of the photos published by the mainstream media.
The most ridiculous is this “body”,
which was just left there
until they put up a barrier:
It was nice that the “deceased” didn’t leak blood everywhere. By most reports, the alleged shooter was killed inside the library.
Someone got arrested:
Some students left in a hurry:
They left their backpacks but took their drinks? And who eats without more stuff – plastic wrap, napkins, paper bag, etc.?
Nevertheless, this is how law enforcement treated innocent people:
Why are they all women?
This was also happening:
So was this:
Don’t forget, the president was nearby for another fundraiser.
Here is the house the alleged shooter was supposed to have burned:
Back to the college. We see officers happy to be there:
The fire department wanted to be part of the event:
So did the meter maid:
To make this bullet hole, wouldn’t the weapon have to have been positioned above the rail and pointed directly at it ?
In case there’s any doubt as to the reason for this false flag event:
Then there was this. It is, after all, Los Angeles County: