Wednesday, December 19, 2012

What's Not Being Told About Newtown, Sandy Hook Elementary School? (Part 1)



The Newtown School Tragedy: More than One Gunman?

Global Research, December 20, 2012
It is now beyond question that the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. all involved patsies, additional gunman and perhaps most importantly, mass media complicity to achieve their political ends. Along these lines and in a fashion now characteristic of how such public executions are framed, the observations and analyses of citizen journalists and alternative media suggest how coverage of the Newtown Connecticut school shooting was substantially altered in the several hours and days following the event.
After the 1995 Murrah Federal Building bombing central elements that would help the citizenry make sense of the event, such as unexploded ordnance found in the structure and Timothy McVeigh’s accomplice, were stricken from the official narrative. Along these lines at the probable behest of government authorities a second gunman accompanying Jared Lee Loughner in 2011 was quickly tossed down the memory hole by news outlets covering the incident. Similar reportorial lapses took place at the Aurora Colorado massacre last July where eyewitnesses attested to spotting James Holmes’ collaborators (or handlers) inside the theater.
When the news media act as willing partners in such acts the public becomes an unwitting accessory in its own psychic imprisonment, lulled into the notion that fair play still exists and public servants remain are intent on service.
“One of the most important red flags of a staged shooting is a second gunman,” health science and investigative writer Mike Adams observes,indicating the shooting was coordinated and planned. There are often mind control elements at work in many of these shootings ... James Holmes, for example, was a graduate student actually working on mind control technologies funded by the U.S. government. There were also chemical mind control elements linked to Jared Lee Loughner.[1]

Emerging Contradictions
Several independent researchers and most recently reporter Rob Dew have over the past few days pointed to evidence strongly suggesting how two additional Sandy Hook shooting suspects were apprehended by police in the minutes following 9:35AM when officers were dispatched to the elementary school.[2]
Recordings of the 911 dispatcher and first responders to the campus all but wholly corroborate initial reports of at least two persons attempting to flee from the scene, with audio evidence of law enforcement officers actually encountering the suspected assailants at around 9:40AM. Excerpts were replayed on Fox News the evening of December 14.
Dispatcher: All units: The individual that I have on the phone is continuing to hear what he believes to be gunfire.
Dispatcher: All units are responding to Sandy Hook School at this time. The shooting appears to have stopped. It is silent at this time. The school is in lockdown.
Dispatcher: I have reports that the teacher saw two shadows running past the building, past the gym, which would be rear ([inaudible] ... to the shooting.
Officer: Yeah. We’ve got him ... [Voice quickening] They’re coming at me [inaudible] ... down the left side.[3]

In the above encounter one suspect is apparently detained by police outside the school and subsequently referenced in an Associated Press interview with a Sandy Hook student who briefly sees the detained man while being evacuated from the school building.
Unidentified student: And then the police like were knocking on the door, and they’re like, “We’re evacuating people! We’re evacuating people!” So we ran out. There’s police about at every door. They’re leading us, “Down this way. Down this way. Quick! Quick! Come on!” Then we ran down to the firehouse. There’s a man pinned down to the ground with handcuffs on. And we thought that was the victim [sic]. We really didn’t get a good glance at him because there was a car blocking it. Plus we were running really quick.[4]

Accompanying aerial footage depicts officers pursuing another suspected shooter in a wooded area outside the aforementioned gym and behind school grounds. They apprehend him and he is seen prone and surrounded by police before being escorted in front of students’ parents to a squad car, an episode recounted by one anonymous bystander interviewed on a local CBS affiliate.
Unidentified Witness: They did walk a guy out of the woods. I saw them walk a guy out earlier with handcuffs. He walked by us and said he didn’t do it.
Reporter: It was a grown man?
Witness: A grown man. Yeah, he’s sittin’ in the front of the police car over there now. So, I mean—
Reporter: He didn’t have a gun?
Witness: No, I didn’t see any gun. [They] just had him handcuffed and he walked by us and looked into the parents eyes and said, “I didn’t do it.”
Reporter: How was he dressed?
Witness: Ah, camo pants with a dark jacket.[5]

Sandy Hook Official Narrative
Such information was carefully expurgated from the official narrative presented by corporate media within hours of the massacre, a storyline Americans are painfully familiar with. Here the 20 year-old Adam Lanza is depicted front and center as the chief culprit of the killing spree. Predictably there is not the slightest reference of additional suspects in ABC News’ representative “timeline” example below.
Reporter Don Harris: 9:40AM: Reports of gunfire at Sandy Hook Elementary
Police Dispatch: “Sandy Hook School. Caller is indicating that she thinks someone is shooting in the building.”
Harris: Police say 20 year old Adam Lanza, seen here as a teenager, wore a bulletproof vest and was carrying at least three semi-automatic weapons, including a rifle.
Alexis Wasik, 8 year old: “Everybody was a little scared crying and I felt, actually, a little sick.”
Harris: Within five to ten minutes the first SWAT teams arrived.
Police Officer: “I need units in the school. I got bodies here.”
Harris: Officers helped to lead several hundred students to a nearby fire station.
[By this time Connecticut law enforcement had apprehended the additional two shootings suspects.]
Ben Paley [student]: “When the policemen came in to get us he told us to close our eyes and—like on the picture on the news—do this [demonstrates hands-on-shoulder position with other child] and run.”
Harris: At 10:30AM President Obama was briefed on the situation while police discovered a second crime scene. The shooter’s mother, Nancy Lanza, who authorities believed may have worked at Sandy Hook at some point, was found dead. Police say Adam Lanza shot her before he stormed the school.[6]

Empowering Myths and Media Manipulation
As the lessons of 9/11 impart, when public knowledge of such horrific events is so woefully deficient the nation’s recollections become the fodder for empowering myths dangerously removed from reality. Devoid of information and effective means for political expression the masses are cajoled to exercise faith and hope in empty promises and an system providing the semblance of empathy, hope and change. Under such circumstances violent calamity, appropriately propagandized by mass media, often provides ample public distraction for decisive political maneuvering.
Journalists capable of exercising a modest degree of autonomy and personal insight would have clearly recognized such leads, thereby extending them to a more rigorous examination of law enforcement spokespersons and the broader Newtown community. Instead, the news media once again wholly abdicated any such responsibility to serve the public by unquestioningly parroting official pronouncements and carefully instructing their audiences on exactly how to interpret the event.
“The anchors are the priests at the funeral before the funeral happens,” journalist Jon Rappoport notes. “They set the stage. They convey to the public the meaning and atmosphere and essence of the whole event. And having done that, there is simply no room for anything that would intrude on this sepulchral mood.”[7]
Behind the meticulously crafted façade a deep vagueness and sorrow remains that cannot be wholly explained away by the made-for-television storyline of an awkward and lagging young man who inexplicably murders his mother, destroys his computer hard drive, gains access to a supposedly high security facility and proficiently executes 26 individuals within minutes. Yet only in an age of almost universal deceit is the public asked to accept such without further inquiry and comment. All the while amidst mass grieving political leaders and public figures showboat their legislative priorities. It is difficult to imagine a more profound marker of an utterly decrepit politics and civil society than the shallow and unquestioning media that churns out a monochromatic worldview while giving adherents the insidious impression of being informed.
[2] Rob Dew, “Evidence of 2nd and 3rd Shooter at Sandy Hook,” Infowars Nightly News, December 18, 2012, A more detailed yet less polished analysis was developed by citizen journalist Idahopicker, “Sandy Hook Elem: 3 Shooters,” December 16, 2012.
[3] Fox News, “911 Call Dispatch Audio Reveals Police Response to Sandy Hook School Shooting,” December 14, 2012,
[4] Associated Press [difficulties with url below], “Raw: Student Describes Scene at School Shooting,” December 14, 2012,
[5] CBS News, “Sandy Hook Elem: Two or More Shooters,” December 14, 2012,
[6] ABC News, “Newtown Connecticut Shooting: Timeline of Events at Sandy Hook Elementary,” December 15, 2012,
[7] Jon Rappoport, “Lanza, Bloomberg, Obama, Guns, Psychiatric Meds, and Mass Hypnosis: The TV Script,”, December 15, 2012.
Copyright © 2012 Global Research

Mossad death squads slaughtered American children at Sandy Hook
By James H. Fetzer
Thu Dec 20, 2012

While liberals and some conservatives believe the time has come to ban assault weapons, the graver threat to our nation’s security has been swept under the rug.
The Sandy Hook massacre appears to have been a psy op intended to strike fear in the hearts of Americans by the sheer brutality of the massacre, where the killing of children is a signature of terror ops conducted by agents of Israel.
This is being used as powerful incentive for banning assault rifles, where most of the public is unaware of the fact that the Department of Homeland Security has acquired 1.5 billion rounds of .40 caliber, hollow-point ammunition, which is not ever permissible in warfare under the Geneva Conventions.
A Senate Subcommittee has issued a report (3 October 2012) based upon its review of 680 “fusion center” reports (from 2009-2001) and found not a single indication of any domestic terrorist threat-not one! None! Since the only domestic “terrorist threats” are ones contrived by the government, especially the FBI, the public needs to know.
This information-as well as the existence of more than 300 FEMA camps and special boxcars to carry dissidents to them-has been deliberately withheld from the American people, because if they were aware of the facts of the matter, it would become obvious that those camps and ammunition are intended to be used against them.
When DHS is gearing up to conduct a massive civil war against the American people, what better excuse could there be for banning assault weapons than the massacre of 20 innocent children at Sandy Hook Elementary School?
The choice appears to be covertly revealing, where “Sandy” means guardian of men (as an allusion to guns) and “Hook” as a euphemism for hooking, gathering or confiscating the only weapons that DHS fears. And who better to slaughter American children than Israelis, who deliberately murder Palestinian children?
Mike Harris of Veterans Today has exposed the pattern relating what happened there to earlier assaults: “This is exactly what Israel did in Norway; the political party that voted sanctions against Israel was retaliated against by a ‘lone gunman’ who killed 77 children. This is what Israel always does, they go after the children.
“It is what they do in Gaza every day. It is what was done in Norway. It is what happened at Sandy Hook. Nobody buys the ‘one gunman’ story anymore, not with the Gabby Giffords’ shooting, not with the Aurora “Batman” shooting, certainly not with Breveik, and certainly not in Connecticut.”

The most likely scenario, given what we know now, is that Adam Lanza and his mother killed the day before. Adam's body picked up by local police. He was attired in a SWAT outfit, including body armor, and stored in the school.
A three-man team entered the school, one was arrested in the school--cuffed and put on the lawn--two went out the back door, one was arrested, the third appears to have escaped. You can find this on helicopter videos.
Those arrested are currently not in police custody; their names were never released. That is a telling sign that we are being sold a story that is based on fiction, not on fact. What else are the local police concealing?
A parallel situation in Aurora, where there appear to have been multiple participants, but the police concealed information about them. The DC Sniper, John Allen Muhammad, was even a active member of Delta Force, but the public was not informed.
His assistant in this killing spree, Lee Boyd Malvo, had been detained in Seattle but was released, even though he was an illegal alien, where INS has refused to explain how that happened. Did “higher authority” intervene?
Nidal Malik Hasan, the US Army Major who killed 13 and wounded 29 during a rampage at Ft. Hood, Texas, even sat next to the Director of Homeland Security during an event at George Washington University. Can that be coincidental?
When the "long gunman" cover story falls apart, then the national press, which William Colby told us was infiltrated by agents of the CIA-“The agency owns everyone of significance in the major media”-resorts to stories of Mind Control and use of drugs.
We have to see through the smoke and mirrors. These attacks typically involve three-man shooting teams, where, once the story is tainted with bogus MK/Ultra conspiracy disinformation, crucial data, like the assault rifle the Sandy Hook having been left in his car, swiftly disappears.
Lenin and Trotsky were terrorists. Lenin was an outspoken proponent of terrorism. The founder of the Lukid Party and sixth Prime Minister of Israel was an Irgun terrorist. Study its history. No nation in the world cares more about its own interests and less about those of the United State than Israel.
The bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946, was a stunning example. The attack on the USS Liberty and Israel’s bombing of its own Embassy and Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994 are other illustration.
Those who study 9/11 are all too aware of the role of the Neo-Cons and the Mossad. But the American press covers it up-and Congress is controlled by AIPAC. As Bill Casey, former CIA Director, observed, “Our disinformation program will be complete when everything the American public believes is false.” Sandy Hook is the latest example.


Newtown: Two Shooters Were Captured Alive!
by Henry Makow Ph.D.December 15, 2012
Obama brushes away a tear, reminding us that he is a criminal, traitor and a fraud who uses the massacre of children to advance his masters' totalitarian political agenda. It's either our children or our guns, he tells Newtown audience.
Proof the US government and media are lying. They are complicit in the mass murder of US children. No mention of two men arrested in any of the coverage. Similarly news media collaborated in 9-11 false flag.
Two shooters caught.
One seen running from building, chased by police. Seen on this aerial video starting at 7.30 min -- More Confirmation from news report.
Another apprehended outside school, "proned out." (Can be heard on Police radio, heard on above video)
More eyewitness evidence man in camouflage pants arrested. Early references to other shooters disappearing.
See UPDATE from George Freund immediately below article.
Who's Really to Blame for School Shooting? (Updated)
The aftermath of the Newtown school massacre is beginning to resemble the 9-11 false flag. Indeed, this is becoming the 9-11 of gun control, probably perpetrated by the same crowd. It's their MO. How long are Americans going to tolerate these pogroms?
The local police dispatch tape carries a report that a teacher saw two shooters running from the scene. (3.25)
According to George Freund, "First officers in the school report the patsy dead. He may very well have been killed by the two fleeing men who were probably the whack team.
"Police also report finding a shotgun. How do you carry a rifle, a shotgun, two pistols, and all sorts of ammo with two hands and kill so many people. You are obviously NOT alone.
"There were two escaping persons. The police appear to confront them. There is someone taken into custody. The alleged shooter is found dead. The police supervisor says the 'DRILL' word corresponding to the princpal's tweet of a drill. "
The presence of other shooters may explain why the killer, Adam Lanza, 20, was wearing a mask, flack jacket and military fatigues. This is so he couldn't be distinguished from the other shooters. If he had intended to kill himself, he wouldn't have needed a disguise.
As with 9-11, when Osama Bin Laden was blamed immediately, the culprit this time was guns. A chorus of calls for gun control went up from Barack Obama and his Illuminati Jewish handlers like Mayor Bloomberg of NY and Dianne Feinstein. lluminati Jewish mouthpieces like Huffpost are going ballistic.

Like 9-11, we can forget about discovering who really executed this attack.
The killer's brother Ryan Lanza, 24, said Adam was mentally disturbed. He had Asperger Syndrome. Neighbours called him "autistic." Why didn't the cry go out to know what medication Adam was taking?
Why isn't there a chorus of demands fora ban on psychological medications? For greater monitoring of people with Asperger? Any doubt Adam played videogames? Do we hear calls for a ban on them?
Adam was the product of a broken family. His parents divorced in 2009. His father moved away and remarried. His older brother hadn't seen him for two years. Why not demands for support for marriage and family?
A friend described Adam as a "Goth." Goths are Satanists who possibly would revel in such massacres. Why not demands for a ban on Goth music and behavior?
(left. Christmas present from Illuminati bankers)
How about a media ban on over-reporting massacres, because of the copycat effect?
Do you think that if 27 soldiers were ambushed and killed in Helmand province yesterday, you would know about it?
(Since 2001 there have been 1,827 such flag draped caskets sent back from Afghanistan to the U.S. Wounded in action numbers total 15,460.)
From 1991 - 2009, there was a ban on photographing flag draped coffins.
Why? Because reports of military setbacks and photos of coffins are bad for morale.
School massacres are also bad for morale too. The national morale.
But that's just the point. The Illuminati want to degrade and demoralize. They want to render us defenceless. They want TSA-style checkstops everywhere and more federal control.
So they blame guns, instead of blaming the real shooters, the multi-billion dollar drug industry, Goth satanism or mass media feeding-frenzies.
If teachers were armed, they could have defended the children. In Israel everyone is armed and ready.
Since our leaders love Israel so much, why don' t they call for more guns, not less?
Americans need protection - from their own Illuminati subverted government.
The cancer is called Cabalism (Freemasonry & organized Jewry) and it has invaded all of society's vital organs. Prognosis: Fatal.
I posted another video on my site. The guy has the aerial footage. They caught [the shooters.] The rifle was found in the vehicle's trunk. The coroner said all were shot with a .223. Lanza only had two 9m/m pistols with him then. [Official story: "Lanza used two semi-automatic pistols, a Glock and Sig Sauer, and reportedly wiped out an entire classroom of young children, then shot several in a second class before taking his own life.")
His Dad's boss works for Obama. The media said he walked silently through the school. Now they're saying he was banging on a closet door shouting, "Let me in." What if the other shooters were turning on him? He would say let me in. As an armed murderer I wouldn't think he would say open the door. He could have fired through the door. It was only a closet. "Let me in," could imply a request for sanctuary. Then there's the shotgun. The police clearly state they recovered one on their radios. [above video] - Why is that initial witness reports of the 2012 "lone gunman" mass shootings always describe TWO shooters? - Some Victims are Not Listed as Teachers on School Website; One Victim Omitted

Who really killed the Connecticut children?
by Kevin Barrett
Friday, December 14th, 2012

When something unbelievably evil happens in one of our schools, like the recent murder of 27 children and teachers at the Newtown School in Connecticut, the media always tells us the same thing: blame the lone nut(s).
But history suggests that many if not most schoolyard massacres, like other large-scale acts of domestic terrorism, have a much more sinister agenda.
Sheriff Pat Sullivan, who ran the Columbine investigation, was arrested last year and convicted of coercing sexual favors from a child in exchange for methamphetamine. His ridiculously short sentence, served in the jail that bears his name, amounted to a slap on the wrist. Rumor has it that Sullivan is part of a pedophile network along the lines of the Finders of Lost Children and the perpetrators of the Franklin Scandal child sex ring.
Some Columbine victims’ family members suspect that Sheriff Sullivan was involved in a “butt rape” incident involving the alleged Columbine shooters. Were those shooters mind-controlled sex-abuse victims?
Rogue intelligence agents and their psychiatrist colleagues have been brainwashing “lone nuts” to commit murder at least since the CIA’s MK-Ultra program achieved its objectives circa 1960.
Why would such “rogue networks” want to send brainwashed Manchurian Candidates into schools to massacre children?
Let’s allow one of the terrorists themselves to answer that question.
Remember Operation Gladio? The Pentagon, through NATO, organized bombings and shootings in the streets of Europe. When one of the terrorists got caught, he explained at his trial: “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public to turn to the State to ask for greater security.” He later explained the “strategy of tension” to the BBC: “To create tension within the country to promote conservative, reactionary social and political tendencies.”
Google “Brabant massacre” for more gory details.
So the answer to the question, WHY? is really very simple: When you terrorize the population, you open the door for fascist, authoritarian politicians.
Operation Gladio never ended. It’s still happening, right here in America.
Wade Michael Page, the “man with a 9/11 tattoo” blamed for the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting, turned out to be a US Army psy-ops specialist.
The “DC Sniper” – the US Army Special Forces whiz who changed his name to “Muhammad” just in time to go on a shooting spree – was another government-sponsored false-flag operation.
So whenever an event like today’s Connecticut massacre screams out at you from your screen: BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID, you should tell the mainstream media brainwashers to go to hell, then join those of us who are exposing the false flag terrorists and setting the stage for a world in which they will no longer ply their bloody trade.
Is This All About Gun Control?
Here are a couple of videos to get you thinking.



Armed Police on Every School Campus Not Practical - There is Another Solution

By: Devvy Kidd
December 22, 2012
It's been nine days since the unspeakable horror of what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. I was in Danbury, CT., in March 2009, doing research so I know the area.

I watched it unfold on FOX live as probably a few million other people did around the country. My first reaction, like so many others: not again. When the streaming feed said 26 dead, 18 children, I literally had trouble processing those numbers. I have watched every horror unfold on the tube from Ruby Ridge to WACO to TWA Flight 800, OKC, 9/11, the murder of former Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown, the murder of Vince Foster and most of the school shootings televised.
Every time something so horrendous happens, the media are all over it like locust. Coverage over the years has become shoddier as every network and Internet news site tries to out do each other. Media staples like Geraldo Rivera ascend on location to get the scoop from people who have been shocked into a state where the pain is so raw they can barely function. I want to tell them: Go away and leave those people alone. After the first day, I don't watch anymore of the circus, so they don't get a ratings bump from me.
As the "dust settles," there are endless corrections. Then comes all the talking heads with their analysis on violence and the head experts; what you end up with is non stop noise on the tube.
All the words that can be said or written about the victims, their families and that community have already been said and written. The same as the dozens before Newtown. Even now as I type this column, I can only imagine what they're going through and wish to God it never happened. My daughter and her husband are both teachers. I think about it a lot.
Newtown isn't the worst if you're looking at numbers:

"The Bath School disaster is the name given to three bombings in Bath Township, Michigan, on May 18, 1927, which killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured. The perpetrator first killed his wife, then committed suicide with his last explosion. Most of the victims were children in the second to sixth grades (7–14 years of age attending the Bath Consolidated School. Their deaths constitute the deadliest mass murder in a school in United States history.
"The bomber was the school board treasurer, Andrew Kehoe, age 55, who was angry after being defeated in the spring 1926 election for township clerk. He was thought to have planned his "murderous revenge" after that public defeat; he had a reputation for difficulty on the school board and in personal dealings. For much of the next year, a neighbor noticed Kehoe had stopped working on his farm and thought he might be planning suicide. During that period, Kehoe carried out steps in his plan to destroy the school and his farm by purchasing and hiding explosives.
"Kehoe's wife was ill with tuberculosis, and he had stopped making mortgage payments; he was under pressure for foreclosure. Some time between May 16 and the morning of May 18, 1927, Kehoe murdered his wife by hitting her on the head. On the morning of May 18 about 8:45, he exploded incendiary devices in his house and farm buildings, setting them on fire and destroying them.
"Almost simultaneously, an explosion devastated the north wing of the school building, killing many schoolchildren. Kehoe had used a timed detonator to ignite dynamite and hundreds of pounds of incendiary pyrotol, which he had secretly planted inside the school over the course of many months. As rescuers gathered at the school, Kehoe drove up, stopped, and used a rifle to detonate dynamite inside his shrapnel-filled truck, killing himself, the school superintendent, and several others nearby, as well as injuring more bystanders. During rescue efforts at the school, searchers discovered an additional 500 pounds (230 kg) of unexploded dynamite and pyrotol connected to a timing device and planted throughout the basement of the south wing. Kehoe had apparently intended to blow up and destroy the entire school."
If someone wants to kill children, adults or both, he/she doesn't need a gun.
Every time the unthinkable happens, shooting at a school or university, the anti-gun zealots are all over the idiot box with their rabid ranting about gun control. More endless vomit that guns are evil. Professional prostitutes (members of Congress) go into high gear with the usual call to ban this weapon or that one. The hysteria this time around has crossed the line by many.

Actress Marg Helgenberger: ‘One can only hope’ NRA members get shot - "On Friday, Author Joyce Carol Oates tweeted in response to that “NRA-sponsored massacre” that new gun control legislation might be forthcoming “if sizable numbers of NRA members become gun-victims themselves.” If that wasn't enough to be considered an implicit wish for more shootings, “CSI” star Marg Helgenberger made sure it was, tweeting that “one can only hope.”
Then we have the mentally ill socialists and communists aka progressives, liberals, Democrats who say things like: "

Mindless, dangerous zombies. Not surprising when you have an illegitimate U.S. Attorney General who hates the U.S. Constitution, the Dis-Honorable Racist, Eric Holder:
"Holder, now Obama’s attorney general, proposed using various levers of media and pop culture to attach a social stigma to guns, just as smoking has been stigmatized in recent decades. “One thing that I think is clear with young people and with adults as well, is that we just have to be repetitive about this,” Holder told the Women's National Democratic Club while discussing how to curb gun violence in D.C. “It's not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We need to do this every day of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

It doesn't matter how many columns are written about guns saving lives. This nation is filled with people who run on emotion and not facts, which is exploited by popular media made up of sissy males and empty headed females. The impostor in the White House thinks he's going to further restrict gun ownership:

Let me just say this: That guy's real name is Barry Soetoro and that is what everyone should call him from this day forward. There is no record anywhere of him changing his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama. He is a pathological liar. A malignant narcissist who is making demands he has no constitutional authority to make. Of course, Soetoro has never worried about the U.S. Constitution. He can appoint braying ass, Joseph Biden, to as many task forces as wants. But, they know there are millions of gun owners in this country who are making it loudly known we will not give up our guns.

As usual, the warped mind of those who want to completely disarm America conveniently over look how many precious children are killed every year in this country sans guns. I covered that in my column,

The Killing Fields of America - Infants, babies, teens. As you see in the short list I provided, mothers, fathers, boyfriends - killed babies, toddlers, pre teens and teens by beatings, throwing them against a wall, beating or choking to death; in some cases, a gun was used. That list was only what I could fit into one column. One source I found from 2008, said based on reported deaths: 1,500 children a year are murdered by parents; four precious children a day.
People don't see how horrendous the problem is until they see a list all in one place. They don't see the carnage going on all over this country every day. Chicago has some of the most anti-Second Amendment "laws" in the country, yet the number of deaths this year alone number 436 as of October 29, 2012.

107 children, youth, young adults killed in Chicago in one year - that article covers March 2011 to March 2012. One can see the escalation. I did find one other item: 446 school age children shot in Chicago so far this year with strongest gun laws in country.
It's really beyond words anymore to describe how violent our society has become, but it's not because of guns. They are inanimate objects just the same as knives, baseball bats and dynamite. It's the user.

Things that don't add up in Newtown
There are some major things about the massacre in Newtown that I have a problem with as far as coincidences, second and third shooters allegedly taken into custody. The key word being allegedly. Yes, I've listened to the police scanner and seen the helicopter clips. As with OKC and 9/11, spontaneous and first impressions and film clips contain a lot of truth that is later suppressed or "massaged".
We have learned a great deal about the killer, his mother and the possible stresser that set that 20-year old off into a psychotic break. The Internet has been burning up with many untrue things or speculation taken as fact regarding medications the killer was or wasn't taking. I have saved a plethora of items and will get to another column early next year. You have to obtain official documents (search warrant affidavits) and things toxicology reports before blasting out there what you think might be in them. That takes time.
There's suggestions about putting an armed guard or police officer in every school in America - a bad idea. Who do you think a deranged killer is going to target first? Why, the one person on campus in a uniform with a gun. Wouldn't take much recon to figure out a pattern for a rent-a-guard at a school. Some school campuses are very large. One isn't going to do it or deter a shooter.
But, how do we protect children and adults in schools and university campuses?
A few days ago, Rep. Dennis Richardson, who serves in the Oregon State Legislature sent out what I believe is a workable, sensible plan that can be implemented all over the country:
"Training in classroom lock-down techniques is valuable, but passive. Classroom lock-down procedures alone fail to protect the children and adults who continue to be murdered before the police arrive.
"To start the discussion, here is a simple, inexpensive way to enable immediate response after the first gunshot in a school is fired. Establish a program of Campus Responders.
"Campus Responders could be two or three responsible adult volunteers in every school (administrators, staff members, teachers or members of the community such as retired law enforcement or military personnel), who are enlisted and encouraged to obtain additional training and regular practice in the use of firearms. Each Campus Responder would have a firearm concealed on their person or locked and concealed in a secure metal gun box bolted in their desks. School district employees with prior military or law enforcement experience would be the initial candidates for this voluntary assignment. No one outside of school and district administration would know the identity of these volunteers.
"In short, having armed and trained personnel in every school would enable immediate response with lethal force if and when the lives of our children and teachers were endangered by a mass murderer.
"If this procedure had been implemented, the number of students and educators killed in every school massacre from Columbine to Virginia Tech to Sandy Hook might have been greatly reduced. (The same would be true if implemented by shop-keepers and mall personnel such as those in Clackamas) In Texas the Harrold School District's “Guardian Plan” already has implemented such a policy. Under present Oregon Firearm Law, school districts already have the authority to do likewise. In Israel and Thailand armed school personnel save the lives of their children. In America the slaughter of our school children continues.
"To refocus this important debate let's consider the following: (1.) Mass murderers may be armed with guns, knives, explosives, and, as we saw last year in China, even hammers. (2.) From the 1998 killings in Oregon's own Thurston High School to last week's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary our students and educators have continued to be slaughtered in our public schools. (3.) There is less than a one in a million chance that a mass shooting will occur in a school on any given day. (4.) Police response times are at least five minutes; and, (5.) The costs are prohibitive and counter-productive to a quality education to turn our schools into educational prisons, with high fences, bullet proof doors and continual police patrols. Nevertheless, as last Friday's tragedy reminds us all, school campus massacres continue to occur and our passive policies have failed to adequately limit the number of innocent victims once the rampage begins."
Now you see, that makes sense in a mad world. No expense to the school and it can be enacted fairly quickly. Of the tens of millions of Americans who own guns, you can add in school teachers, administrators, janitors, sport coaches and others on campus. Some are likely former military; men and women who are already trained. Same applies for retired local police officers and sheriffs. In more rural areas, kids grow up around guns and know how to shoot. They might now be school personnel. No one except those tapped for duty would know who or how many armed personnel are at a school everyday. They would not all be in the same location, so when shots ring out, they can converge on the shooter long before any local police or SWAT show up. THAT will save lives and guess what? A gun will stop a gun toting killer dead in his tracks.
Rep. Richardson is also right about classroom lock down. Students become sitting ducks because it doesn't take much fire power to blow the lock and handle off a door. The best solution is for the shooter coming through the door is to find himself looking right down the barrel of .357 magnum. Bang. You're dead, not more children or teachers.
Additionally, we have tens of millions of retired military and policemen and women. Not all, but I would venture to say that large numbers of them would be willing to donate maybe two hours a day at a school. For smaller schools, one at the front entrance and one at the back. If you have more volunteers, do it in shifts for the day. Kids will get to know those men and women, potential shooters will know they will die instantly if they even try. College campuses present a bigger challenge, but not one that can't be solved if responsible gun owners, administrators and local law enforcement all come together.
For every school district that implements such a sensible plan, make sure the population gets saturated by the media. Schools should send a notice to every parent letting them know so that all students know. TV, radio and newspapers (hard copy and on line) letting the public know. Publicizing the fact that every school in a district now has armed personnel on campus will make potential killers think twice. Maybe not all of them because of mental health issues (another column), but it will have a chilling effect.
Gun free zones are magnets for killing.
That issue has to be addressed with your local school board, NOT the Outlaw Congress:

No. 93-1260
on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit

[April 26, 1995]
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court.
"In the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990, Congress made it a federal offense "for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone." 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(1)(A) (1988 ed., Supp. V). The Act neither regulates a commercial activity nor contains a requirement that the possession be connected in any way to interstate commerce. We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3.
"On March 10, 1992, respondent, who was then a 12th grade student, arrived at Edison High School in San Antonio, Texas, carrying a concealed .38 caliber handgun and five bullets. Acting upon an anonymous tip, school authorities confronted respondent, who admitted that he was carrying the weapon. He was arrested and charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §46.03(a)(1) (Supp. 1994). The next day, the state charges were dismissed after federal agents charged respondent by complaint with violating the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990. 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(1)(A) (1988 ed., Supp. V). [n.1]
"A federal grand jury indicted respondent on one count of knowing possession of a firearm at a school zone, in violation of §922(q). Respondent moved to dismiss his federal indictment on the ground that §922(q) "is unconstitutional as it is beyond the power of Congress to legislate control over our public schools." The District Court denied the motion, concluding that §922(q) "is a constitutional exercise of Congress' well defined power to regulate activities in and affecting commerce, and the `business' of elementary, middle and high schools . . . affects interstate commerce." App. to Pet. for Cert. 55a. Respondent waived his right to a jury trial. The District Court conducted a bench trial, found him guilty of violating §922(q), and sentenced him to six months' imprisonment and two years' supervised release.
"On appeal, respondent challenged his conviction based on his claim that §922(q) exceeded Congress' power to legislate under the Commerce Clause. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed and reversed respondent's conviction. It held that, in light of what it characterized as insufficient congressional findings and legislative history, "section 922(q), in the full reach of its terms, is invalid as beyond the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause." 2 F. 3d 1342, 1367-1368 (1993). Because of the importance of the issue, we granted certiorari, 511 U. S. ___ (1994), and we now affirm.
"For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the Court of Appeals is Affirmed."
The right step forward:

More to come on all the shootings we've seen from workplace to schools.


© 2012 - - All Rights Reserved

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.
Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at: You can also sign up for her free email alerts.

E-mail is:*******
What Are the Real Gun Control Issues?
In the past our nation has legislated outright bans on drugs, abortions and pornography as well as the sale and consumption of alcohol. So, how well did those bans work?

Guest Column Jim Yardley
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
With the horror of Newtown, Connecticut and the deaths of twenty children (and the six adults who were trying to protect those children) fresh in the public’s mind, the Progressive gun control machine has gone to work in yet another attempt to limit the rights of Americans to own firearms.
No feeling human being can help but wish that there was some way to prevent any recurrence of those murders, but no thinking human being can believe that total prevention is possible.
Once again Progressives and other anti-gun activists are blaming the access to guns as the main culprit in this tragedy even though it can be seen that a gun ban will never end the possession and use of guns in this country.

In the past our nation has legislated outright bans on drugs, abortions and pornography as well as the sale and consumption of alcohol. So, how well did those bans work? Our citizens simply ignored many of those laws, with the Era of Prohibition being the most glaring example.

So if the existing legislated limitations on the right to own or carry a gun were ignored, exactly what would the government do? Apparently the best thing that our political class can imagine is to draft another gun control law or re-implement a law which had already been shown to be ineffective.
Adam Lanza, the alleged assailant, ignored all existing gun control laws. You (and big government statists) might ask, “How could that be?” The answer is quite simple, actually. Mr. Lanza essentially stole the guns that he used. He was saved all the trouble of filling out forms, having his background checked, having to pay large amounts of money to the government for permits, licenses and fees, and, in this case, delivery was fast and cost free. All and all a good deal for Mr. Lanza. Not so good for the twenty-seven human beings that were the targets of whatever demons drove Mr. Lanza.
The point is that regardless of what laws have been passed, and regardless of how strenuously they are enforced, the only way that the government, any government, can remove guns is to confiscate them and close down all legal means of acquiring any firearm.
Gun control advocates claim that even an action as extreme as confiscation would, at least, eliminate the kind of mass murder that occurred at that Connecticut elementary school.

Really? Eliminate?
John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, Andrei Chikatilo
I submit that John Wayne Gacy murdered half again as many children and never used a gun in the process. Of course Gacy killed his 33 victims over a six year period of time, not all at once, so I suppose that makes him less of a mass murderer and more of a serial killer. Would stronger gun control laws have prevented those 33 deaths?
Ted Bundy killed at least 30 young women over a period of four years, and he never used a gun either.
There has always been a nearly complete ban on firearms in the former Soviet Union, yet Andrei Chikatilo murdered 52 women and children between 1978 and 1990.
But Gacy, Bundy and Chikatilo apparently have no bearing on the idea that mass murder would be eliminated if we, as a society, could just get rid of the guns.
What utter rubbish!
And can any rational person actually believe that criminals would not be able to acquire guns if they were banned? Such a prohibition on guns would result in exactly the same response that occurred when alcohol was prohibited—the criminals would get their guns from other criminals. I feel fairly sure that a few more urbane criminals in the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels would be tempted to send a thank you note to the members of Congress and the Obama administration for providing them with a new source of income over-and-above their current revenue from drug sales.
Can anyone believe that the illicit importation of illegal firearms would be stopped by Janet Napolitano’s “virtual” border fence? When you consider the tons of drugs that seem to seep through that border along with the millions of illegal immigrants who meander into our country as if they were on a guided tour, does the idea that our government could effectively eliminate the smuggling of guns seem reasonable?

In addition to such professional criminals, how many currently law-abiding citizens would actually become criminals by surreptitiously acquiring guns from the same source as the professional criminal. The only difference would be in the purpose of buying that gun. The professional would purchase a gun to commit crimes (including murder) while the private citizen would buy a gun to prevent the professional criminal from being successful (at least on the personal level).
Finally the debate over gun control has little or nothing to do with the ideas that are bandied about concerning the Constitutional right to bear arms. The anti-gun crowd, and I include our President as one of them, always couch the argument to say that they aren’t trying to take guns away from those who enjoy hunting or sport shooting. They seem to imply that the reason the 2nd Amendment was drafted was to protect the right to shoot a deer.
Once again, I must say Rubbish!
The 2nd Amendment was drafted not to protect Americans from the danger of food shortages, but the danger of a shortage of freedom.

The founders were very clear in their view of why the right to bear arms was essential to the freedom that was so dearly won during the American Revolution. I give you three founders, and how they viewed the issue.
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”—Thomas Jefferson
The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”—George Washington
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”—Alexander Hamilton
This from the men who risked their lives, founded the nation, and supported the Constitution and its Amendments. Must more actually be said?
Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller for a variety of manufacturing firms, a Vietnam veteran and an independent voter. Jim blogs at, or he can be contacted directly at
Gun Culture and Gun Control Culture
Gun culture of the school shooter is the lobby scene in The Matrix, the frag or be fragged multiplayer gaming culture of Halo and Doom, and the Joker killing his way across Gotham
Daniel Greenfield
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Hardly had the blood been scrubbed off the floors in Newtown than everyone who was anyone had begun shifting the blame from Adam Lanza to some intangible social failure.
Back in 2002, Michael Moore trundled his bulk over to Colorado to exploit the Columbine massacre for a general rant about gun culture, American foreign policy and how hard it was to find a shop selling bacon grease by the ton at two in the morning.
In his film, which won an Oscar for Best Documentary, Moore gave his audience what they wanted, lots of scenes of “hicks and hillbillies” buying, selling and giving away guns all over the place to illustrate the murderous ravages of American gun culture. Some of those scenes were staged, but it didn’t matter since Moore was catering to an audience that had nothing but contempt for working class Americans and would believe any awful thing about them.
What did gun culture have to do with a plot by two disgruntled dorks upset over being called “Faggots” a few times too many? About as much as gun culture has to do with Adam Lanza, another award winning product of the, “Maybe some people deserve to get beaten up” club.
Your average school shooter is unhappy and angry, irreligious, incapable of fitting into a community and filled with rage that he exercises through violent fantasies. His culture isn’t gun culture. It’s loner culture. Video games do not cause him to kill, but they are how he entertains himself until he can get a taste of the real thing.
Urban posse of emasculated men of no worth that brandishes weapons as a way to get respect
Adam Lanza, Dylan Kleibold, Eric Harris, Seung-Hui Cho, James Holmes, One L. Goh and Jared Loughner had as much in common with what the Michael Moore Fan Club thinks of as “gun culture” as Michael Moore does with the working class. Whatever gun culture they had was not the American Scots-Irish culture of the hunter, the rancher and the militia member, but the urban posse of emasculated men of no worth that brandishes weapons as a way to get respect.
The gun culture of the school shooter is the lobby scene in The Matrix, the frag or be fragged multiplayer gaming culture of Halo and Doom, and the Joker killing his way across Gotham. None of these products of mass entertainment make one a killer, but they are also far more illustrative of the type of gun culture that defines school shooters, than anything that Michael Moore and the MSNBC talking heads mean by gun culture.
For most Americans there is no gun culture, only the ownership of guns. To the extent that any gun culture has developed it was in response to a gun control culture that sought to demonize the ownership of firearms. The traditional and religious culture of the American gun owner has little in common with the power fantasies of the school shooter. To the gun owner, a firearm is a necessary tool. To the school shooter, it is a way to stop feeling powerless, a way to get beyond the ersatz joys of killing bots and avatars, of watching Keanu Reeves spin through the air while filling a mob of policemen full of lead, with the joy of the real kill.

But that has not stopped anyone and everyone from opining on the great malady of American gun culture. Jim Boeheim, the Syracuse basketball coach, took the time out to blather on about it for ten minutes. A Washington Post writer named Max Fisher claimed that American gun culture was “unique” because Americans own a lot of guns. That is roughly the level of fact-based discourse on gun culture that you can expect from gun-control culture which asserts that ownership is identity.
The Battle Creek Enquirer ran an editorial which asserted that “The gun culture in this country is insane” and then failed to define what that gun culture consisted of except to say that, “The insanity of America’s gun culture is that in the face of staggering evidence to the contrary, the gun lobby successfully peddles the lie that we are safer when we ease access to firearms.”
The definition of gun culture insanity then is believing that when a dork who has seen the Matrix or The Dark Knight or blood splatter on his monitor a few times too many comes bearing lead, it is better to be able to defend yourself than to be a target. It’s absurd, of course, we are told by gun control culturalists, to believe that ordinary civilians can do anything in such a crisis except wet their pants and hope that the SWAT team doesn’t get stuck in traffic.

But in 1966, during the Texas Tower Massacre, a Co-Op manager named Allen Crum grabbed a rifle and accompanied three Austin police officers up into the tower and helped give them cover while they took down the sniper. But that was in 1966. Today Crum would have been shot for picking up the rifle and Officer Martinez, who picked up a shotgun and fired into the shooter’s prone body after he had already been severely wounded, would have been dismissed from the force, put on trial and would have spent the next decade dodging civil suits and doing infomercials to raise money.
Zero Tolerance campuses and in our Gun-Free Zones
And that’s why we’re so much safer today, than we were then, on our Zero Tolerance campuses and in our Gun-Free Zones, where no one is allowed to have so much as a pocket knife and no one can do a thing when a shooter arrives except lie on the floor and hope that the killer picks another victim.
At Salon, which is like Slate, if Slate were a failure, Amanda Marcotte urges that we attack “not the guns themselves, but gun culture”. Amanda, mainly known for getting the Duke case wrong and being fired from the Edwards campaign, means that we should ban gun ads in newspapers.

“A lot of liberals aren’t tuned into this, because they live in their own enclaves and absorb media that doesn’t really cater to the gun crowd, but gun advertising is common in many markets,” Amanda breathlessly reports to those organic pastry shoppers of San Francisco and the Off-Broadway crowd taking in the latest transsexual cabaret spectacular. While she never does get around to defining what the dreaded gun culture is, she does mention that, “Americans simply don’t like giving up perceived rights.”
If only they spent more time in organic pastry shops and transsexual cabarets they might realize that they are only giving up their perceived Bill of Rights for the real right to free birth control in the best bargain since Esau traded his birthright for a mess of organic free trade pottage.
Finally Jessica Pieklo, writing at a site whose menu is limited to “Animals”, “Women”, “Politics”, “Food”, “LGBT” and “Global Development”, in that order, informs us that gun culture and rape culture are a product of “white masculinity”. An hour ago I just passed a non-white driver whose car had 9MM decals on his windows and was blasting a song where the word “hoes” came up a lot, but there are topics that just can’t be discussed even for a site that covers everything from LGBT to Animals.

For all the loose talk about American gun culture, no one really seems to be able to define what it is. Defining gun culture by the entertainment industry drifts too far into Hollywood and Detroit, and away from the rural culture that is the real target of gun control culture. And that just leaves gun controllers grasping at gun ads and gun ownership, and the omnipresent white devil who never stops buying Manhattan for a bottle of whiskey and objectifying things in ways that males of no other race do.
Instead there are a thousand articles written in children’s blood crying out, “We can’t just do nothing.” Something must be done. Now. Last week. If only we ban more weapons, we can be as safe as Norway, home of the worst shooting spree of all, or Connecticut, which already has an assault weapons ban. And after those screeds come calls from politicians to “set aside the rhetoric” and have a serious conversation about taking the Bill of Rights out back and putting a bullet in its head. For the children who had no one to protect them when a gunman came to their school and will still have no one to protect them when gun control culture gets its way.

After these come a torrent of armchair psychology analyses of America’s gun culture, which are only slightly more elegant versions of Jessica Pieklo’s thesis about Freud and Michael Moore’s thesis about rural America. And those are what gun culture is really about. After all how can you be confident of your own superiority unless you have a documentary and a hundred articles affirming it for you by the traditional method of putting down the people at the bottom of the ladder.
What liberals think of as gun culture is really shorthand for rural America. It’s what liberals won’t say, but it’s what they mean. Americans are still sentimental about the village, so, for now, the number of movies that portray the rural community as ideal, rather than a hive of small-minded bigots, is still rather high. But there are backdoor ways of getting at the same topic and talking about gun culture is one of them.
When liberals talk about “gun culture”, they mean the same thing that Barack Obama did when he told his San Francisco fundraiser friends about the people out there who still cling to their bibles and their guns. It isn’t about the guns really, though gun control culture is worried about having that much personal autonomy in the hands of people who don’t share their values and like their independence, it’s about rural America. And rural America, like guns, is another symbol that stands in for traditional America.

The left cannot talk about how much it hates this country. Gun culture is one of its dog whistles. A way to talk about how much it hates America without actually saying it out loud where everyone can hear. Talking about gun culture not only allows the left to publicly vent its hatred for America, gun control, like racism, is another way that the left teaches Americans to hate America.
But the truth about gun culture is that the left has a great deal more in common with Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris, Adam Lanza and Jared Loughner. Far more than those shooters had with any phantom conservative gun culture.
The American left, like any high school shooter, is bitter, angry and filled with contempt for the rest of the country. Stuck in a country made of flyover country that thinks of leftists the way Columbine students thought of Klebold and Harris, the left treats Americans to their own Columbine Massacre every time it defends criminals and terrorists, every time it wrecks American manufacturing and laughs all the way to the bank as it bankrupts Americans.
For all the crocodile tears that the left spills, after all the children’s blood that it pumps into a syringe and then spill out on paper, the left culturally identifies with the shooters and the shooters culturally identify with the left. They are both odd men out in a place that they don’t belong, dressing up their inner ugliness in a false sense of superiority. The shooters believe that they are superior intellects victimized by the mediocre people around them who are unable to appreciate their genius. That is the cursory bio of every leftist who troops down to New York, San Francisco or Portland.

And both the left and the shooters agree that the people you are shooting at should not have guns.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City writer and columnist. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and his articles appears at its Front Page Magazine site.
Daniel can be reached at:
Gun Control, Thought Control and People Control
The defining American code is freedom. The defining liberal code is compassion.
Daniel Greenfield
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
The gun control debate, like all debates with the left, is reducible to the question of whether we are individuals who make our own decisions or a great squishy social mass that helplessly responds to stimuli. Do people kill with guns or does the availability of guns kill people? Do bad eating habits kill people or does the availability of junk food kill people?
To the left these are distinctions without a difference. If a thing is available then it is the cause of the problem. The individual cannot be held accountable for shooting someone if there are guns for sale. Individuals have no role to play because they are not moral actors, only members of a mob responding to stimuli.
You wouldn’t blame a dog for overeating; you blame the owners for overfeeding him. Nor do you blame a dog for biting a neighbor. You might punish him, but the punishment is training, not a recognition of authentic responsibility on the part of the canine. And the way that you think of a dog, is the way that the left thinks of you. When you misbehave, the left looks around for your owner.
The cult of the left believes that it is engaged in a great apocalyptic battle with corporations and industrialists for the ownership of the unthinking masses. Its acolytes see themselves as the individuals who have been “liberated” to think for themselves. They make choices. You, however, are just a member of the unthinking masses. You are not really a person, but only respond to the agendas of your corporate overlords. If you eat too much, it’s because corporations make you eat. If you kill, it’s because corporations encourage you to buy guns. You are not an individual. You are a social problem.
The individual is nothing, the crowd is everything. Control the mass and you control the individual
Individual behavior is a symptom of a social problem. Identify the social problem and you fix the behavior. The individual is nothing, the crowd is everything. Control the mass and you control the individual.
That is how the left approached this election. Instead of appealing to individual interests, they went after identity groups. They targeted low information voters and used behavioral science to find ways to manipulate people. The right treated voters like human beings. The left treated them like lab monkeys. And the lab monkey approach is triumphantly toted by progressives as proof that the left is more intelligent than the right. And what better proof of intelligence can there be than treating half the country like buttons of unthinking responses that you can push to get them to do what you want.
Would you let a lab monkey own a gun? Hell no. Would you let it choose what to eat? Only as an experiment. Would you let it vote for laws in a referendum? Not unless it’s trained to push the right button. Would you let it drive a car? Nope. Maybe a bicycle. And if it has to travel a long way, you’ll encourage it to use mass transit. Does a monkey have freedom of speech? Only until it annoys you.

You’ll take away most of the monkey’s bananas, which you’re too lazy to go and find for yourself because you have more important things to do than fetch bananas. You train monkeys to fetch bananas for you. That is how the enlightened elites of the left see the workers whose taxes they harvest; as monkeys that they taught in their schools and created jobs for with their stimulus plans for. And the least that the monkeys could do is pay their taxes, because the monkeys didn’t build that. You did.
You do plan to take care of monkey’s medical expenses, at least until they get too high, and spay and neuter it with free birth control. You will train it to be the smartest and most well-behaved monkey it can be. And when it gets too sick, you plan to have it mercifully put down so it doesn’t hang around spreading diseases and depressing you with its misery.
And what’s wrong with any of that? Human beings are just evolved monkeys. It’s not as if you’re being cruel to the monkey. You’re engaged in what you might charitably think of as a symbiotic relationship with the monkey. If the monkey were smart, it might think of you as a parasite. But you have a whole lot of rounds of ammunition stockpiled in case of a Planet of the Apes scenario.
If you assume that there is as much of a substantive difference the elite and the common man as there is between a man and a monkey, there is nothing particularly inappropriate about such behavior. We herd animals. Liberals herd people. The human being is the livestock of the liberal animal farm.
Liberals believe that they are the master race on account of their superior empathy and intelligence
The Nazis believed that they were the master race because they were genetically superior. Liberals believe that they are the master race on account of their superior empathy and intelligence. There’s an obvious paradox in believing that you have the right to enslave and kill people because you care more, but that didn’t stop millions of people from joining in with revolutions that led to a century of bloodshed in the name of movements that cared more.
The defining American code is freedom. The defining liberal code is compassion. Conservatives have attempted to counter that by defining freedom as compassionate, as George W. Bush did. Liberals counter by attempting to define compassion as liberating, the way that FDR did by classing freedoms with entitlements in his Four Freedoms.
On one side stands the individual with his rights and responsibilities. On the other side is the remorseless state machinery of supreme compassion. And there is no bridging this gap.
Liberal compassion is not the compassion of equals. It is a revolutionary pity that uses empathy only as fuel for outrage. It is the sort of compassion practiced by people who like to be angry and who like to pretend that their anger makes them better people. It is the sort of compassion that eats like poison into the bones of a man or a society, even while swelling their egos with their own wonderfulness.
Compassion of this sort is outrage fuel. It is hatred toward people masquerading as love.
Compassion of this sort is outrage fuel. It is hatred toward people masquerading as love. And that hatred is a desire for power masquerading as outrage which in turn is dressed up as a deep love for others and empathy for all living creatures. Peel away the mask of compassion and all that is underneath is a terrible lust for power. And the only way to truly justify the kind of total power summoned by such lusts is by reducing the people you would rule over to the status of non-persons.
The clash that will define the future of America is this collision between the individual and the state, between disorganized freedom and organized compassion, between a self-directed experiment in self-government and an experiment conducted by trained experts on a lab monkey population. And the defining idea of this conflict is accountability.
To understand the left’s position on nearly any issue, imagine a 20th Century American and then take away accountability. Assume that the individual is helpless and stupid, has little to no control over his own behavior and is only responding to stimuli and functions in a purely reactive capacity. Then use that data to come up with a response to anything from kids getting fat to a football player shooting his wife to terrorists firing rockets at Israel. The only possible answer to reactive behavior is to find the thing being reacted to and condemn it.
If you want to fake being a member of the left on any topic and in any setting, master this simple phrase. “But we have to look at the root causes to see who is really responsible.” Congratulations, you can now get by anywhere from Caracas to Brussels to Berkeley.

The root cause is a perpetual search for an accountability vested in systems rather than people. That search always ends up with systems and ideologies, rather than mere people, because it justifies the destruction of those systems and ideologies. And destroying systems and ideologies allows them to be replaced by their progressive replacements.
The final failure of accountability for the left is a failure of moral organization, while for the right it is a failure of personal character. The right asks, “Why did you kill?” The left asks, “Who let him have a gun?”, “Who didn’t provide him with a job” and “Who neglected his self-esteem?”
Freedom goes hand in hand with personal moral organization of the individual by the individual
Freedom goes hand in hand with personal moral organization of the individual by the individual. Organized compassion, however, requires the moral organization of the society as a whole. A shooting is not a failure of the character of one man alone, or even his family and social circle, it is the total failure of our entire society and perhaps even the world, for not leveraging a sufficient level of moral organization that would have made such a crime impossible. No man is an island. Every man is a traffic jam.

Social accountability on this scale requires the nullification of the personhood and accountability of the individual, just as the moral organization that it mandates requires removing the freedom of choice of the individual, to assure a truly moral society. When compassion and morality are collective, then everyone and no one is moral and compassionate at the same time. And that is the society of the welfare state where compassion is administered by a salaried bureaucracy.
Choice is what makes us moral creatures and collective compassion leaves us less than human. The collective society of mass movements and mass decisions leaves us little better than lab monkeys trying to compose Shakespeare without understanding language, meaning or ideas, or anything more than the rote feel of our fingers hitting the keyboard.
This is the society that the left is creating, a place filled with as many social problems as there are people, where everyone is a lab monkey except the experts running the experiments, and where no one has any rights because freedom is the enemy of a system whose moral code derives from creating a perfect society by replacing the individual with the mass. It is a society where there is no accountability, only constant compulsion. It is a society where you are a social problem and there are highly paid experts working day and night to figure out how to solve you.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City writer and columnist. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and his articles appears at its Front Page Magazine site.
Daniel can be reached at:
Don`t Confuse the Right to Bear Arms for a Right to Commit Violence
Eric Blair
Monday, December 17, 2012
The political storm taking place in the aftermath of the tragic school shooting in Newtown (CT) is unprecedented. The Internet is ablaze with demands for stricter gun laws, the banning of all guns, and even for killing gun owners. The issue of gun rights has just become much more heated.
It's normal to react emotionally to such an awful event, especially when we can relate to the victims. This shooting hit home for me much more so than others in the past. One, because I'm from a small town in Connecticut and, second, because the principal killed was my son's Kindergarten principal before we decided to homeschool. So I deeply understand the grief.
However, we must do our best to not react out of emotion, and try to maintain some of our logical sensibilities. Even gun rights advocates don't know how to respond because the usual arguments like self-defense or that guns don't kill people without someone pulling the trigger are lost to those grieving.
What's most disturbing is that some gun control advocates seem to be equating the right to own a gun with the right to commit violence. These are two very different things. No one has the right to commit violence or kill. The right to own a gun is not a license to kill, it's a right to self-defense. I believe self-defense to be a God-given right, maybe even an obligation to preserve ourselves. The "devil" is in the details, however.
Possessing a gun should not be a crime; misuse of the gun against another is a crime. In a sense it's like drug prohibition. Drug possession should not be a crime because they may only cause the user harm, but if the addict violates someone else's rights (theft, assault, etc.) while on drugs or to get drugs, then they broke the law.
Speaking of prohibition, were fully-automatic Tommy guns to blame for Al Capone's violence or was it the policy of alcohol prohibition? Additionally, do gun control advocates believe they will get rid of guns by prohibiting ownership of them? Has drug use gone down since prohibiting drugs? Even limited prohibition of guns will not solve anything or bring back the deceased from this atrocious act.
Tragedies and accidents will happen and they will cause pain, but no amount of "gun control" or Nerfing the world will prevent them. It is also unlikely that even a very limited right to purchase a firearm would slow the pace and severity of these tragedies. These tragedies are shocking because they are not the norm.
Some argue that the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms for defense is outdated. Is the right for a citizen in Afghanistan to own a gun outdated? Is it in Israel? Or Chicago? America is no different. Perhaps because there are so many guns in the hands of street thugs it's even more vital to protect our right to self-defense in the United States.
I agree that there should be limitations on firepower, but citizens should be able to possess equal force of anyone that they may have to defend against, including law enforcement. Therefore, if there are any legal limitations on guns, it should extend to all possible aggressors. In other words, cops should not be able to have fully automatic assault rifles if citizens aren't allowed to have them. The government should not have a different set of laws than the people.
Of course, no citizen should have advanced military weapons like rocket launchers because they aren't used in law enforcement in the US, yet. So I don't condone the right of personal ownership of nukes, but I also don't condone it for our military either.It is shameful that the US has 12K gun homicides per year. Yet over 75% are gang-related (Wiki). In other words they're heavily influenced by social policies like illegal drugs and the desperation of poverty. Even more shameful are 17.5K suicides by guns each year. We have a problem much deeper than guns...and I wish that was the focus of all the outrage.
The motivation behind the seemingly random acts of violence against innocent people in Connecticut and Aurora is much more difficult to determine than Al Capone's violence. Yet, it is just as important because the guns did not cause the violence, mentally unstable people did.
Everyone who is hurting over this incident is clamoring for a quick fix to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. Unfortunately, there is no quick fix because this is a deep morality problem and maybe a psychiatric drug problem, not a gun problem. And, in that regard, we have a long way to go.
When the people at the highest levels of our "leadership" condone killing innocent children in other countries, how can we expect that mentality to not trickle down into society? When our first reaction to difficult children is to drug them with chemicals proven to cause suicidal/homicidal tendencies, why are we continually surprised when that is the outcome?
These are just two of the many questions that should be asked by those who wonder why this happened beyond the choice of what type of tool was used during this massacre.
It seems the long-term solution is creating a more loving and compassionate society, but judging from the hatred directed at innocent and lawful gun owners the last few days, this too is a long way off.
PS: I am not a gun owner because I believe in peace and love and all that hippie shit, but I don't want to lose my right to own one should I feel it's necessary to defend myself.
Lanza, Bloomberg, Obama, guns, psychiatric meds, and mass hypnosis: the TV script
by Jon Rappoport
December 15, 2012
Mayor Bloomberg is leading the charge to take away guns in the wake of the Newtown child murders. The pressure is on.
Apart from grandstanding, which Bloomberg knows how to do, this is all about deflection from the main event: the killer himself.
Last night, I watched network coverage, wherein, of course, the anchors were in Newtown, standing on the street, “trying to make sense of the whole thing.”
If they’re so interested, along with the public, in figuring out why Adam Lanza killed all those children, you would think, with their enormous resources, they would find out who Lanza’s doctor-psychiatrist was in five minutes and ask him about his patient.
Of course, that’s sacred ground. Patient-doctor confidentiality.
Except the patient is dead.
So much for the networks wanting to know who Adam Lanza really was. It’s all a sham. They just want to keep asking the question over and over, pretending to be in the dark about the whole thing.
They want to “deepen the mystery” and emphasize how futile it is to get into the mind of a killer. They’ve got that rap down. They use it every time one of these mass murders happens.
They know about the psychiatric-drug connection to murders and suicides. But they won’t say the magic words. They’ll just keep biting their tongues.
And “out of respect for the victims,” the drug companies aren’t running ads anywhere near this media coverage. Translation: the companies don’t want to encourage the public to make the connection between meds and murder.
Prozac, murder. Zoloft, murder. Paxil, murder. Ritalin, murder.
Bloomberg is playing the shill for new gun control. He’s the point man of the moment, insisting “the president do something meaningful” right now. It’s an orchestrated little play.
“Let’s ask Michael Moore what he thinks.”
“Oh good, Rupert Murdoch is weighing in against guns.” Yes, he’s providing the “balanced” in “fair and balanced,” so people stop associating FOX News with “right-wing gun advocates” for a few hours.
And the Boston mayor is chiming in, too.
Meanwhile, the public is under the spell of mass hypnosis. Can’t stop watching the tube. Never stops to think, “Hey, why don’t they put Lanza’s doctor on the screen and have him talk about his patient?”
There are other elements of this mass trance. People bolster their belief that what happens in life is out of their hands. “See, it’s just like I thought. We have no power. I have no power. All we can do is grieve and try to heal. Light a candle.”
Notice another odd thing. No one in the tightly bound Newtown community is saying, “We’ve got to get to the bottom of this. We’ve got to find out what this killer was.” If they are saying it, you’re not seeing it on camera.
The people of Newtown can find out in an hour who Lanza’s doctor was. They can march right up to his office or house and knock on the door and tell him to come out and talk.
Why don’t they do it?
They’re still in shock, yes. But they’re also in a hypnotic state, when it comes to doctors. Don’t question the high priest in the white coat. He lives in a different sphere from the rest of us.
Ignorance=grief=healing=being a good citizen.
Here’s a phrase you’re hearing all over the tube from politicians and officials. “We have to come together.” What the hell does that mean? I even heard the police chief say it, in reference to “resolving what happened.” Garble. Pure garble.
No, “coming together” means giving up. It means abject helplessness. It means, above all, no outrage.
Have you see one person on television express outrage?
That’s verboten. They won’t allow that. Perhaps they’ll put a few citizens of Newtown on, if they want to say it’s time to take the guns away. A little bit of outrage on that score is all right.
Who knows? Maybe Newtown will become the center of a national movement to ban guns. Maybe a few PR agencies will tap in and go for it.
We’re looking at operant conditioning here. It’s acceptable to feel grief, confusion, pain. It’s acceptable to feel helpless. But outrage? No. That’s not in the playbook.
And the public, glued to their TV sets, absorbs the message. “This is the way I’m supposed to feel in the wake of one of these tragedies. This is what I can feel.”
And it’s all “in deference to the victims and their families.” That’s the capper. Anger is covertly being framed as an insult to the children who died.
This is the show we’re watching. It’s scripted and sculptured.
Part of mass mind control is defining for people what they can feel in a given situation. Left to their own devices, people feel all sorts of things. But because television is the sticky substance that binds the collective together, it becomes the counselor and teacher. It tells people how to experience an event.
It’s powerful. It parades people across the screen who suddenly have special status because they’re on the screen, because they’re being watched by millions. And those key characters, who get their thirty seconds and two minutes are proxies, who instruct the public about emotion, about range of allowable emotion.
This IS mind control.
It’s like an eight-year-old at a funeral. He doesn’t have a clue about what he’s supposed to do, what expression he’s supposed to have on his face, whether he’s supposed to say anything, where he’s supposed to stand, what he’s supposed to feel. So he looks around at the adults. He picks up their cues.
This is the public, watching television. Picking up cues from the citizens of Newtown USA. And those citizens are screened by the producers of the network news shows, before they’re brought on camera.
We’ve got a father who’s pissed off, who wants to go to the home of Lanza’s doctor and ask him questions? Forget it. Sorry, sir. Maybe we’ll get to you later.
The network anchors themselves exude an air of sober respect and somber “humanity.” That’s what they get paid for. Not everybody can do that and keep track of what’s being said in their ears by the producers. The somber tone is the money.
The anchors are the priests at the funeral, before the funeral happens. They set the stage. They convey to the public the meaning and atmosphere and essence of the whole event.
And having done that, there is simply no room for anything that would intrude on this sepulchral mood.
All this occurs while Barack Obama sits in the White House, conferring with his advisers, debating the political upside and downside of issuing an overriding executive order that would limit citizen access to guns.
“Sir, I think the sentiment, at this moment, would be a flood in your favor. This is the time. We’ve got all these dead children. Congress has refused to act in the past, so you do now. You take the whole matter into your own hands, as the nation’s leader in a time of crisis. Sir, you say, ‘Enough. We’ve had enough. All these children, cut off from the rest of their lives and from their loved ones. I refuse to stand by and do nothing.’ I tell you, sir, it would work. We can drum up enormous support from our people, our supporters, and from the press. They’ll say you’re showing great courage. We can pull it off. We can do this. It’ll set the whole stage for your second term. We’ll drown out the opposition…we’ll organize candlelight marches in the inner cities. Thousands, hundreds of thousands of people will come out of their homes and walk down the streets. Mothers holding photos of their dead children. The networks will be there in full force. We’ll put this on television 24/7, and overwhelm our enemies…”
Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at
If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by shopping through Jon’s

Also See:
Were the Batman Murders a Covert Op?
30 July 2012