The Denver killer is clearly a very very sick young Man.

[BadFish]

so, after all your waffle, i think your trying to say that "why would the us gov outlaw guns now when they could have done it before?" i believe they are doing it now as when the economy crashes they will want their martial law to be the "ultimate authority" without any resistence.

your abuse has been reported.

That is not what he is saying at all.

He is saying why would they need to mind control people into massacring people when they could just invoke the spirit of the original constitution and use that to pass law.

You can't just change the question into one that is easily answerable and fits your argument better. What are you a politician?

 

[BadFish]

 

[BadFish]

this is standard procedure in conspiracy land. not content with the contradiction that the existing authorities are attempting to take power, they layer on symbology, where everything has to be ritualitic with warning and/or signals. you need to tell the other authorities that you did this for reasons of taking power ( i think), or you condition the public to the future planned events (films with aliens in them are conditioning us for the impending alien invasion, etc). i'm sure symbology might have made sence in a world of 200 years ago or more, today i cant see why you wouldnt just send an email.

This is the part I don't get, Why would, if the NWO/overnment etc etc were working out all these complex ways to impose new laws over a largely apathetic nation who don't notice half the things that get passed anyway. Why would they bother to leave us little symbolic clues? One of those articles suggested that popular culture foretold this happening (as far back as 1966). How would they know? and why would the government use popular culture to warm us (or at least those of us with conspiracy sight) of their impending plans. Life isnt a movie and the bad guys don't explain their plans to us so we can save the world.

 

[Nibble]

That is not what he is saying at all.

He is saying why would they need to mind control people into massacring people when they could just invoke the spirit of the original constitution and use that to pass law.

You can't just change the question into one that is easily answerable and fits your argument better. What are you a politician?

Quite, however his ill thought out response was that they try to get the nation to want what the government wants. This would never work as those in favour of unlimited access to guns will never change their opinion, just look at the NRA. We have seen countless similar incidents across the US and no-one into guns has ever changed their mind enough to go with the theory of a manipulated law. Despite the world's best minds debating this for years Brunswick has it sussed.

 

[Nibble]

And to add, I can't see any US government outright banning gun ownership, way too many corporations make billions out of it and institutions like the NRA give way too much money to the government for them to risk that dollar. There may be some talk of ineffectual gun control, as there is after every single one of these shootings.

 

[BadFish]

read the thread again, and you will see i state very clearly it is my free will opinion (e.g belief) from my perspective. i have even said my theory cannot be proved, but more weight can go into it when the gun laws change.

in this i find no delusion, i have researched mind control, spoke to a world expert at length on it, and this (for me), has many hall marks of it.

[MENTION=599]beorhthelm[/MENTION] the documentary i posted above goes more into this "lone nut" meme. for me, it just doesn't add up, someone can be unstable and a little p'd off at the world sometimes, but to go and shoot up 70 odd people.....with no motive or message or plea. have you looked at the pictures of him? he's not present, he is drugged or under mind control.

most mentally damaged people in a really bad violent state, would go for someone they knew, irratically too, but cold, calculated, calm attacks on strangers is much of the time (in my view) via mind control.

The last paragrah is a perfect opportunity to provide a link to a scientific study or journal to prove your stated theory. This is one time you have chosen not to provide a link. Why?

How do you know that most people in a really bad violent state would go for someone they know? What about the others?

 

[Nibble]

The World's Weirdest/Stupidest Conspiracy Theories

(in no particular order, with each theory's author or main proponent in parentheses)

The driver shot JFK. (the late William Cooper)
The Beatles were designed and sent to the U.S. by the British Psychological Warfare Division, to undermine the morals of American teenagers. (Lyndon LaRouche)
Christ's Crucifixion was staged. (Hugh Schonfield) Christ eloped with Mary Magdalene, and one or both of them fled to France to raise their family. (Baigent/Leigh/Lincoln)
Christ and his disciples were a magic-mushroom cult. (Dead Sea Scrolls scholar John Allegro)
HIV/AIDS was created in a lab.
HIV does not cause AIDS.
Man never landed on the moon. It's not even possible. But there is an alien base there. (see Wikipedia; for an artful and very funny parody of how these theories can be patched together from unrelated material, watch the mockumentary Dark Side of the Moon)
The Zapruder film is entirely fake, even though it contradicts the findings of the Warren Commission. (Jim Fetzer)
Stephen King killed John Lennon. (Steve Lightfoot)
WWII was staged. It never really happened. The Illuminati employed elaborate special effects, stage magic, and phony journalism to scare the world into pacifism. (Donald Holmes)
Queen Elizabeth I was a man. The real Elizabeth died as a child.
George H.W. Bush was really George Scherff Sr., a Nazi sent to destroy America as a teenager and adopted by Prescott Bush (Scherff was also an assistant to Nikola Tesla, and stole all Tesla's inventions after he was murdered by Otto Skorzeny and Reinhard Gehlen). Hitler was still alive in Montana in 1997, and Josef Mengele is keeping himself alive and youthful with a regimen of hormones and cannibalism. Oh, and Curious George was inspired by a young George Scherff Jr.; that's probably why Alan J. Shalleck was murdered by two men he met through a gay sex network one day before the movie premiered. (this information comes from a man named Eric Berman, who claims he heard it straight from his girlfriend's dad, Otto Skorzeny, in Florida during the late '90s. Skorzeny died in Madrid in 1975.)
One promoter of the Scherff-Bush story adds that Josef Mengele was the real Zodiac, the Boston Strangler(s), and the anthrax letter mailer. (The Bush Connection eBook- Home Page)
The 1939 War of the Worlds radio broadcoast was a psychological warfare study funded by C.D. Jackson on behalf of the Rockefeller Foundation, designed to find out how Americans would react to an enemy invasion. Funny... in a trailer for his mockumentary F is for Fake, Orson Welles did say the WoW broadcast had "secret sponsors". (Daniel Hopsicker)
A really old one that just won't die: Jews drink the blood and eat the flesh of Gentile children during Passover. Some Catholics still revere the relics of Medieval child saints supposedly slaughtered and devoured by Jews.
The doomed Franklin Expedition was sent to the Arctic not only to find the Northwest Passage, but to secretly investigate UFO sightings that had been reported since the 1700s. The men were captured, experimented upon, and eaten by giant aliens. (Jeffrey Blair Latta)
Hitler and some associates escaped to the Arctic in a submarine, to live with super-advanced aliens who reside within the hollow earth. (This story originated with Edward Bulwer-Lytton's novel The Coming Race, was treated as fact by the pre-Nazi Vril Society, was bolstered by the forged "secret diary" of Admiral Byrd, and was adopted by the likes of Ernst Zundel)
Denver International Airport was built expressly to conceal a vast underground complex, headquarters of the New World Order elite. Clues are hidden in the airport's peace-themed mural.
Scientology: Billions of years ago the intergalactic overlord Xenu used a film to brainwash our souls ("Thetans") into believing in the world's major religions, which he invented.
Gnosticism: The entire material world is an evil trap created by the imposter God of the Bible.
Nation of Islam: White people were created in a lab.
Jesuits sank the Titanic to kill some of the world's richest, most powerful Jews.
The early Middle Ages (614-911 A.D.) never occurred. Everything that supposedly happened during those years was either a misunderstanding, an event from a different era, or an outright lie - Charlemagne, for instance, is a fictional figure. And we are actually living in the 1700s. (Herbert Illig's phantom time hypothesis)
Shortly before he left office, Bill Clinton secretly signed into law the National Economic Security and Reformation Act (NESARA). This act would have completely restructured the U.S. government by - among other things - forgiving all personal credit card debt and mortgages, abolishing the IRS, restoring constitutional law, and somehow ensuring world peace - but the Supreme Court placed a gag order on it, and threatened death to any government official who breathed word of its existence. NESARA activists around the world are agitating to get the act announced and instituted.
Aspartame, flouride, genetically modified foods, and vaccines are used specifically to keep us sick and open to suggestion, and/or as part of a secret depopulation plan designed by the world's elite.
Atlanta child murder theories: Victims were used for CDC research into Interferon; KKK Klansmen posed as cops to wipe out young black men (Dick Gregory); white scientists needed the boys' foreskins to produce a cure for cancer and/or a youth serum. (Dick Gregory again)
Jeffrey Dahmer was an actor hired by the Ambrosia Chocolate company to pose as a cannibal killer so no one would object to the factory being torn down and another one built with illegal tax breaks (posted by "manoftruth" on online forums devoted to Rush and Bon Jovi, along with rants on Wicca and Jews; his name might be Mark Zahn, but who knows?).

And here's a fun one: By combining two separate conspiracy theories, you can turn Hitler into Jack the Ripper!
Theory #1: Prince Eddy, Duke of Clarence, faked his death to move to Germany and become Adolph Hitler.
Theory #2: Prince Eddy, Duke of Clarence (and/or Freemasons acting on his behalf) was Jack the Ripper.
Hence, Prince Eddy might have killed several prostitues, faked his own death, then resurfaced in Austria as Hitler.

 

[dingodan]

He is saying why would they need to mind control people into massacring people when they could just invoke the spirit of the original constitution and use that to pass law.

Because as Nibble says,

Quite, however his ill thought out response was that they try to get the nation to want what the government wants. This would never work as those in favour of unlimited access to guns will never change their opinion, just look at the NRA.

This is why it is not done legislatively, without first changing public sentiment. Today you might have a powerful gun lobby like the NRA, and a majority of citizens who are not strongly pro or anti gun rights. What you want tomorrow, because you cannot change the NRA, is a majority of citizens who are no longer on the fence, but actively oppose gun rights. This is achieved by the media, in what they cover and how they cover it. Sometimes it is achieved by creating events in the first place.

This technique is designed to create the perception of consensus.

EDIT: And I am not saying that this has been done for that reason, I don't know. But are things faked or disproportionately emphasized to manipulate public opinion, yes, I am surprised its in dispute.

 

[BadFish]

So, in your view there is no effort to shape public opinion for political purposes using the media?

We are no where near conspiracy theory here. We are firmly in the realm of media and political communication. Calling someone mad is not making a logical argument.

To be fair to you Dingodan, I think that this is where you are and i think you make some reasonable points on a variety of subjects you make a logiacl argument. I don't also agree but I can see where you are coming from.

[MENTION=2850]brunswick[/MENTION] though (sorry fella) is slap bang in the middle of illogical bonkers conspiracy theories.

 

[Nibble]

Because as Nibble says,



This is why it is not done legislatively, without first changing public sentiment. Today you might have a powerful gun lobby like the NRA, and a majority of citizens who are not strongly pro or anti gun rights. What you want tomorrow, because you cannot change the NRA, is a majority of citizens who are no longer on the fence, but actively oppose gun rights. This is achieved by the media, in what they cover and how they cover it. Sometimes it is achieved by creating events in the first place.

This technique is designed to create the perception of consensus.

Then why has it not happened after Columbine or any other of the numerous incidents in the US? Why is this time special? Oh that's right you tied it in with the collapse of the dollar. If the US givernment has wanted to impliment such order there have been many, many more opportune moments in history to do so. And do it before global communication networks were established so conspiracy theorists could rumble them? You cannot afford to be this daft mate, the governments of the world are screwing us over before your very eyes but you don't see it because you are too busy chasing lizards from Zargon 5 and believing mind control tales. You may well be the pawns, falling into the very trap you think you have uncovered. Mwahah, mwahahaaaaaaaaa

Having said that, you don't seem quite as bonkers as Brunswick.

 

[BadFish]

Because as Nibble says,



This is why it is not done legislatively, without first changing public sentiment. Today you might have a powerful gun lobby like the NRA, and a majority of citizens who are not strongly pro or anti gun rights. What you want tomorrow, because you cannot change the NRA, is a majority of citizens who are no longer on the fence, but actively oppose gun rights. This is achieved by the media, in what they cover and how they cover it. Sometimes it is achieved by creating events in the first place.

This technique is designed to create the perception of consensus.

EDIT: And I am not saying that this has been done for that reason, I don't know. But are things faked or disproportionately emphasized to manipulate public opinion, yes, I am surprised its in dispute.

Presuming the idea that all US massacres are set up by the government through mind control: is the idea to keep on trying until the America people decide that guns are bad and should be banned? To me this plan does not seem to be working, after each massacre we have the same debate and nothing changes. Why is this one going to be any different?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

 

[dingodan]

Then why has it not happened after Columbine or any other of the numerous incidents in the US? Why is this time special? Oh that's right you tied it in with the collapse of the dollar. If the US givernment has wanted to impliment such order there have been many, many more opportune moments in history to do so. And do it before global communication networks were established so conspiracy theorists could rumble them? You cannot afford to be this daft mate, the governments of the world are screwing us over before your very eyes but you don't see it because you are too busy chasing lizard

Lizards? The one who smelt it dealt it mate.

Actually if you look at the history gun controls have increased incrementally as atrocities take place. You don't do everything in one go, you move slowly step by step. This is akin to the story of the frog in boiling water, if you turn up the heat suddenly the frog jumps out, if you turn it up slowly it never knows and you cook the frog alive.

For example after Columbine:

"The shooting resulted in calls for more gun control measures. In 2000 federal and state legislation was introduced that would require safety locks on firearms as well as ban the importation of high-capacity ammunition magazines. Though laws were passed that made it a crime to buy guns for criminals and minors, there was considerable controversy over legislation pertaining to background checks at gun shows. There was concern amongst the gun lobby over further restrictions on Second Amendment rights in the US.[75][76] In 2001, K-Mart, which sold ammunition to the shooters, announced it would no longer sell handgun ammunition, action encouraged by and documented in Michael Moore's film Bowling for Columbine."

And Virginia Tech:

In August 2007, the Virginia Tech Review Panel Report recommended that the state's General Assembly adopt legislation "establishing the right of every institution of higher education to regulate the possession of firearms on campus if it so desires" and went on to recommend campus gun bans, "unless mandated by law." The report also recommended gun control measures unrelated to the circumstances of the massacre, such as requiring background checks for all private firearms sales, including those at gun shows.[1] Governor Kaine made it a priority to enact a private sale background check law in the 2008 Virginia General Assembly, but the bill was defeated in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee.[120] Pro gun rights parties viewed this larger move as an unwarranted expansion and as a possible prelude waypoint akin to full gun registration for all gun sales.[121]

The idea is that each time you get a bit further along.

 

[BadFish]

Have we considered the possibiliy that he was not under mind control or durgged up to the eyeballs but actually in a state of shock at the realisation of what he has just done? Or that his mind has closed down due to what he has just done? or that he is seriously mentally ill?

all of these are more logical explanations of his demeanor in court that mind control.

 

[dingodan]

Presuming the idea that all US massacres are set up by the government through mind control: is the idea to keep on trying until the America people decide that guns are bad and should be banned? To me this plan does not seem to be working, after each massacre we have the same debate and nothing changes. Why is this one going to be any different?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Presuming the idea that all US massacres are set up is stupid and I don't think anyone is saying that.

 

[BadFish]

Lizards? The one who smelt it dealt it mate.

Actually if you look at the history gun controls have increased incrementally as atrocities take place. You don't do everything in one go, you move slowly step by step. This is akin to the story of the frog in boiling water, if you turn up the heat suddenly the frog jumps out, if you turn it up slowly it never knows and you cook the frog alive.

For example after Columbine:



And Virginia Tech:



The idea is that each time you get a bit further along.

This little at a time technique will take decades to actually produce a gun ban. [MENTION=2850]brunswick[/MENTION] has predicted one by Christmas.

 

[BadFish]

Presuming the idea that all US massacres are set up is stupid and I don't think anyone is saying that.

presuming that all are is stupid, but presuming this one is is not stupid. Which ones should we presume are? and how can we tell?

My next question is..... Why this one and not all the others? Why not presume they all are? it would follow your boiling frog idea

 

[beorhthelm]

Presuming the idea that all US massacres are set up is stupid and I don't think anyone is saying that.

yes it is, as stupid as the idea that this one on its own has been set up for some agenda. but people are suggesting exactly that, and that other event are too.

 

[dingodan]

This little at a time technique will take decades to actually produce a gun ban. [MENTION=2850]brunswick[/MENTION] has predicted one by Christmas.

Well I don't predict one by Christmas, although if they ever declare a state of national emergency over there I think they will try to.

You are right it takes decades. But the "central planners" think in terms of decades and half centuries. They think long term, and they rely on the fact that we don't.

 

[BadFish]

My next question

If the NWO/Government are so intend on turning the American public against guns why are they not using popular culture (which they control) to do this?

Why haven't we seen the beginning of the end of the glamorization of the gun in Hollywood movies? It is still inconceivable to imagine an all American hero without a gun in his hand. Surely the government would want to begin the process of demonizing the gun through, popular culture and the media. this would either work hand in hand with the mind control strategy or even work better and negate the need for massacres.

 

[dingodan]

presuming that all are is stupid, but presuming this one is is not stupid. Which ones should we presume are? and how can we tell?

My next question is..... Why this one and not all the others? Why not presume they all are? it would follow your boiling frog idea

Saying it's possible, is not saying it is absolutely what happened. If you accept that "all" are, that means "this one definitely is", which nobody is saying. It may be some people's view, but nobody is claiming to know it, or be able to prove it. It is suggested as possible.

You don't think it is possible?