Three armed women teachers shot Adam Lanza in a classroom

 

Three Women Teachers with Guns Shot Adam Lanza in a Classroom

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

When everybody is diagnosed with a mental disorder, gun permits will be a thing of the past.

 

Take that seriously.

 

At a presidential debate, Obama was asked about achieving gun control. He said, “Enforce the laws we’ve already got. Make sure we are keeping the guns out of the hands of criminals…[and] those who are mentally ill.”

 

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2012/10/17/keeping-guns-out-of-the-hands-of-the-mentally-ill/

 

In case you’ve been sleeping in a cave for the past few years, the US government is doing everything it can to create more categories of crimes, and the psychiatrists are expanding the list of (fictional but enforceable) mental disorders, as they also relentlessly promote “more diagnosis and treatment.”

 

Some estimates state 20-25% of the US population is suffering from a mental disorder. These are absurd and cooked figures, for several reasons, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is that huge numbers of people can be arbitrarily labeled as such.

 

So legally owning or not owning a gun may soon hinge on a broader definition of “mentally ill,” changed to “having been diagnosed with a mental disorder,” because that is one back-door way to execute a massive gun ban.

 

Simply put: diagnose everybody and his brother with a mental disorder, and then assert that any such diagnosis bars a person from obtaining a gun permit.

 

Psychiatry, in addition to destroying lives through toxic drugs, becomes a political instrument for gun control.

 

In the July editions of both Psychology Today and The Psychiatric Times, the same editorial, written by Dr. Allen Frances, America’s most influential psychiatrist, spelled out a clear position:

 

Guns do kill people and the number of people depends on the number of guns and the number of rounds they can fire in a given period of time.”

 

Of course, no mention is made of the psychiatric drugs that induce violence and murder.

 

Dr. Frances sums up his unequivocal position: “We really have only two choices…accept mass murder as part of the American way of life, or…get in line with rest of the civilized world and adopt sane gun control policies.”

 


I thought I would explore the issue of mental illness from a slightly different perspective, however: WHY ARE FANATICAL GUN GRABBERS PSYCHOTIC?

 

What is the nature of THEIR mental disorder?

 

In the wake of the Newtown massacre, the gun-control forces are on the march. Ban this, ban that, go after the Doomsday Preppers and bitter clingers.

 

The gun grabbers don’t respond to the obvious charge that, when honest people have weapons for self-defense, they can, in fact, defend themselves and stave off crime, harm, and death.

 

This point doesn’t make a dent.

 

Neither does arguing Second Amendment. Neither does painting a picture of a society in which the only people who have guns are the government and criminals. The gun grabbers seem to like that picture. At least theoretically.

 

Here are a few truths you can take to the bank:

 

If the media in this country (which are notoriously anti-gun) made a big deal out of every case in which an armed citizen successfully defended his home against a violent intruder, and made every such person a hero, we would have a different mood in America. Everybody would see the sense in gun ownership.

 

In the case of the Newtown killings, the media would be saying, “Now here is a tragic case in which no one in the school was carrying a weapon.” And everybody would see the sense and the truth of that.

 

So really, it’s a matter of what the media cover and how they cover it, and what they ignore. That’s all it is. It isn’t anything else. In other words, they’re running a psyop.


The Matrix Revealed


Point two: the government doesn’t want private citizens to own and carry guns because that would diminish the role of government.

 

The people in charge hate it when private citizens take over a self-appointed government function. It’s insulting. It’s people saying to the government, “We don’t need you.” It’s proof that government acts in many, many ways that are intrusive and preemptive.

 

No need to worry, officer, I caught the thief as he was leaving the liquor store. I pulled my weapon and put him down on the ground and cuffed him. He’s in the back of my car.”

 

No, no, no. no. The government must be in charge of everything that pertains to showing or using a gun. No outsiders allowed.

 

Yes, Mrs. Smith, I’m sorry we’re late, and I’m sorry your husband was beaten to a pulp by that intruder, but we have other crimes to process. We have to man speed-traps. It’s better that your husband didn’t have a gun, let me assure you. Why? It just is. Now, let me call an ambulance. I hope they get him to the hospital in time.”

 

Imagine what the response would be if you asked an IRS executive what he thought about a flat consumer tax on bought goods that would replace the whole IRS code.

 

We’re talking about government jobs here. Jobs and money and pensions.

 

Private citizens must not do what the government does.

 

In case you hadn’t noticed, this spills over into the health field. The FDA certifies, as safe and effective, every (poisonous) medical drug before it can be prescribed for public use.

 

The FDA therefore controls drug treatment.

 

If somebody comes along and cooks up, in his kitchen, an herbal brew that knocks out the flu like a ridiculous little sissy in two hours, that’s a threat. Suddenly, a private citizen is miles ahead of the FDA (and the drug companies). No, no, no.

 

If home schoolers educate their kids better than government-run schools do, that’s another sore point. That’s bad. It expose the government factories that manufacture illiterate children.

 

Third point: if enough citizens were well-armed, it would take a full-scale federal invasion to overcome them in case of, oh, secession from the federalized United States.

 

The feds, of course, would win in the long run, if they killed enough people, but the publicity would be devastating to the government. Think Waco multiplied by a thousand or a million.

 

And in the process, word would get out about these well-armed private citizens’ grievances against the central government. The grievances would make sense to a lot of people watching the carnage unfold. Can’t have that. No, no, no.

 

Fourth point: A lot of people in this country grow up thinking they have to take care of other people. That’s really all they know how to do. This goes far beyond any understandable humane impulse.

 

This is meddling. It’s moving in on other people’s private business. The meddlers turn out to be vicious little scum. Well, where else are they going to be able to exercise these cheap impulses, other than in government jobs?

 

The corollary to this is: “I’m the hero. I protect you. I…you what? You protected yourself? No, you’re not allowed to do that, because then I can’t be a hero. You’re supposed to be the helpless citizen on my watch. If I can leap tall buildings, you have to be grounded. Otherwise, my life is in vain.”

 

Fifth point: Elites want to continue to own America. They want to have sway over the land and resources and people and money. Their minions and agents are the official people with weapons. That’s the way it works. It has to be a one-sided game. If millions and millions and millions of private citizens owned guns and knew how to use them, the tin gods wouldn’t be able to sleep well at night.

 

Sixth point: So-called liberals hate people who own guns. For them, guns are symbols of everything else they hate. Religion, land ownership, property rights, fences, and boundaries. Unless, of course, those fences define the liberals’ land.

 

Corollary: Many conservatives hate people who own guns, too, when they perceive those people are ready to decentralize power away from an overarching corporate-government control- nexus.

 

These are all elements of a true psychosis. It needs to be treated.

 

Short of mandatory sedatives, or a sudden attack on a lonely street at night by armed thugs, I recommend mandatory gun ownership for every non-felon adult in the US. This would solve the problem expeditiously.

 

I especially want to see all members of Congress packing heat in their chambers. If, once in a while, there is a shooting, well, we can catch it on C-Span. It won’t be lost to history.

 

I also want to see Chris Matthews in his MSNBC studio with a .45 strapped to his leg, the one that tingles.

 

There is one caveat to my proposal. In order to create a fully armed population, that population must be responsible, which is to say they must understand inviolable private property rights. They don’t have to own property, but they have to know that such a thing as private property exists. Why? Because property is one of the things an armed citizen has a right to defend.

 

Unfortunately, we’re losing the concept of private property like water leaking out of battered rowboat. It’s part of government’s plan, because government wants to own everything that isn’t already nailed down by its partner mega-corporations.

 

And government’s thinking goes this way: “Since we own everything, our cops defend it with guns; there is no reason for private armed citizens to defend it; it isn’t theirs.”

 

Meanwhile, I have to get going. I just got a message that three armed women teachers shot a guy named Adam Lanza in a classroom. I’m heading over to check it out.

 

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

Two movies, two mass murders

 

Newtown: Two Movies, Two Mass Murders, and Questioning All the Facts. Torrid Political Implications are at Stake.

By Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

The Dark Knight Rises and The Hunger Games.

 

We’ll get to them in a minute.

 

This article is in the interest of full disclosure. The easy way out is to accept the basic facts given to us by the police and media. So let’s take a breath, back up, and take a wider view.

 

Multiple media sources state Adam Lanza, the accused Newtown mass murderer, wore a mask while he killed 26 people in the Sandy Hook Elementary School. So who IDed him as the killer?

 

Obviously, the police, after the fact, when Lanza was dead.

 

In any crime with such torrid political implications (“take away the guns”), we have to question all the facts.

 

Presumably, the police found Lanza dead with a bullet wound from a gun lying next to him. They saw he was wearing a mask and body armor. They assumed he was the killer.

 

Later, the gun was traced back to its owner, Lanza’s mother. Bullet analysis of the victims revealed this was the murder weapon.

 

So it was a murder-suicide.

 

Unless there was a different person who did the shooting (cops found and arrested a man wearing camo in the woods near the school…what happened to him?). And who was the man police had “proned out” near the school?

 

An alternate scenario: Lanza was the patsy. The actual shooter(s) in the school killed him with the murder weapon.

 

Oh, well, that’s impossible.

 

Really? Why?

 

Because “everybody knows” Lanza did it?

 

Because the media report what the police tell them?

 

Because the police drew the “obvious” conclusion when they found a masked and body-armored Lanza dead with the murder weapon next to him?

 

It all comes down to this. Conventional reality vs. extraordinary reality. The overwhelming majority opt for the former every time.

 

Lee Oswald was the lone shooter (the majority don’t even believe this now). Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK (the evidence says he couldn’t, because he standing on the wrong side of RFK).

 

Lanza would be the perfect patsy. Loner, shy, vulnerable, behaved strangely, Asperger’s Syndrome; MOTHER WAS AN AVID GUN COLLECTOR, had taught her son to shoot; relative of the family tells CBS News the mother was worried about collapse of the economy, wanted weapons in case she had to defend her home and family (DOOMSDAY PREPPER)…and there you have just the right scenario for the gun grabbers, who have been going at it full-bore in the last two days.

 

These kids would be still be alive if the mother wasn’t a doomsday prepper.”

 


On top of that, as I wrote in my previous article, we now have the boggling connection to The Hunger Games. In that sci-fi novel and film, 24 children are picked to take part in a competitive, national, blood-sacrifice, killing ritual…one child survives at the end and 23 die.

 

Twenty died in Newtown.

 

And the author of The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins, lives in Sandy Hook, next to Newtown.

 

And this means? This is just the kind of bizarre and insane op secret societies are reputed to enjoy. Ordinarily, I would ignore this sort of thing and just call it a coincidence, but it’s too improbable. I can’t prove the killings in Newtown were part of that kind of op. But I can’t disregard it, either. The “coincidence” is just too stunning.

 

And if The Hunger Game connection is real here, then all bets are off.

 

If you recall, there was another recent mass murder in which a film played a part. Batman. The Dark Knight Rises. The Aurora theater. The Joker. James Holmes, also masked.

 

There are serious questions about exactly where he was arrested. At the theater exit, as the media reported? Or as other witnesses say, in his car. Was Holmes a patsy, set up to take the fall for murders committed by pros?

 

Corbin Dates, a purported eyewitness in the theater, and at least one other unnamed witness, spoke on camera to the media about a second shooter in the theater.

 

Yes, we want answers. We want them quickly. We always do. But it’s better to open up all lines of questioning, rather than chase a cooked-up scenario down the rabbit hole and end nowhere.

 


Of course, in the Newtown murders, we have all sorts of contradictory reports that surfaced early on. These “errors” have been attributed to “typical confusion that always accompanies” the first stories from a scene of chaos. We always write off these mistakes. But why should we?

 

There was the confusion about weapons. The killer used a hand gun. No he didn’t. It was a rifle. There was a rifle found in the trunk of a car. No, three weapons were found. The killing weapon was Sig Sauer pistol. No, a rifle, It was a Bushmaster rifle. No, it was a Sig Sauer rifle.

 

Were all these early errors made in the heat of a chaotic scene, or were some “errors” put out there to confuse a true investigation and possibly delay media and police, while the real killers escaped?

 

Inferring from the medical examiner’s statements, Lanza, if he was the killer and if he was using a Sig Sauer rifle, would have employed at least three clips in the killing spree. He would have had the persistence to reload that many times and continue the shooting?

 

A violent outburst, to which Lanza might have been prone, if he indeed had a developmental disorder called “Asperger’s” is not the same thing as the methodical murder of 27 people, reloading three or more clips in his rifle.


The Matrix Revealed


And now let’s back up again, to the scene of the crime, as police were inside the school. From reports, the police entered the school after the carnage was over.

 

They found Lanza’s body. They saw the mask and body armor. They inferred he was the shooter. But what would have prevented the real pros, the killers, from killing Lanza and dressing him in a mask and body armor and leaving him there?

 

Oh, that couldn’t happened. People wouldn’t do that.

 

Really? Why not?

 

The two movies, The Hunger Games and The Dark Knight Rises, provided a backdrop of dystopian chaos and violence, and a society in which coherence has broken down. Criminal forces, winning. The vision of a peaceful and prosperous nation in which institutional justice stands a chance, shattered.

 

Whether you call “them” the Globalists, the secret societies, the Illuminati, the elites, the Bilderbergs, the CFR, the Trilateralists, you come up with the same game plan:

 

Destroy America, destroy the idea of individual freedom, destabilize the webs of community, engender fear, make it seem necessary for top-down control to be exerted, “to save us all” from rampant chaos.

 

These two movies, with tremendous advance publicity and anticipation, bolster the premise that American is too far gone to save.

 

Now, on top of that, we have two horrendous mass murders connected to these films, and the murders seem to prove the point: we are, in fact, too far gone…unless our wiser leaders step in and make great changes in the way we live.

 

What changes? Take all the guns. Restrict freedom. Spy on all of us 24/7, no matter where we are, no matter what we are doing.

 

Then and only then can we have peace. Then and only then can we live side by side in a Matrix of happiness.

 

If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.”

 

Yes. Be good little boys and girls. Obey all the rules. Accept new rules, whenever they are dictated. Keep your eyes straight ahead. Think good thoughts. Be positive.

 

But even then, be warned, as in Newtown, the perfect little American community, we can experience the murder of innocence. That’s the lesson that is being imparted.

 

Even then, we learn, there will be a struggle to establish this happy Matrix we all desire. Therefore, all the more reason to surrender our rights and freedoms, so our leaders can work their overarching solutions without resistance and interruption.

 

From chaos, order.

 

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.