- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
by Gary Ghost
Thursday, Dec. 27, 2012 at 11:36 PM
Guns are an effective form of human violence, which is why they are so often employed in both war and crime. They are dangerous and deadly. Reasons for their existence are not always, or even often, noble. They kill. This is to say we human animals kill—and nowhere more so than for political reasons—such as a nation venturing abroad for purported reasons to exact war against terrorists, etc. (while not ironically understanding that war is terrorism). And yet there is something “more” dangerous than weapons and that is politics itself (that history reminds us over and over again). Guns do “not” exist in a vacuum—they are artifacts built for and by a corrupt species of creature. No government ever—no matter how much naïve trust by blind patriotism exist—should be trusted to the point citizens just hand over their right to defend themselves from those in power. ALL forms of government are corruptible, and so are ALL forms of institution. This government (and especially both major political parties and their lobby cronies), if not thoroughly corrupt, is still too corrupt—including its capacity to violate human rights. Banning of guns (or other Constitutional rights) here in the United States must be understood within these recent radical changes that have happened especially since 9/11. It could be the equivalent of giving Mafia thugs your last weapons.
Letter to All Americans About Gun Control from a Dissident Independent
From Gary Ghost, one American male (no party or organization affiliation)
[Note: This essay is written by a true minority and was not written to please any majority point of view. Some statements or attitudes herein may rile or alienate readers to the point of wanting to reject before giving it an entire hearing. However it may be worth reading in its entirety to understand the overall message. If you feel this argument is vital and important feel free to share, post, email, etc., especially your companions and people with clout such as politicians, organizations, etc.]
Guns, as means of deadly force, are but one significant variable in this complex and too often dangerous world of many political realities. Violence, in general, which is really our core subject, as it is also the gun’s mission, has had an exceedingly long human history—far surpassing the invention of gunpowder or any particular weapon. This is to say violence, in all its possible forms, will not go away any time soon. Nor is it limited to our human race such as triggered by willfulness or passion. It is part of a natural order—far broader than rage, calculation or moral assumption—rather intrinsic in the dynamics of change—as hail, tornado, and lighting strike.
Guns are an effective form of human violence, which is why they are so often employed in both war and crime. They are dangerous and deadly. Reasons for their existence are not always, or even often, noble. They kill. This is to say we human animals kill—and nowhere more so than for political reasons—such as a nation venturing abroad for purported reasons to exact war against terrorists, etc. (while not ironically understanding that war is terrorism). Plus stockholding investors make lots of money from weapon manufacturing companies—that sometimes sell to both sides of a conflict.
Fear is another reason why weapons exist. Fear dominates, or at least resonates within, the very existence of humanity—especially in this “age of anxiety” with its many unknowns and likely future forms of despair. And yet fear is not necessarily bad, as some fears are rational, some rational only learned through becoming aware, whereas others are irrational or misguided, and still some others hard to categorize because of the unpredictability of factors involved. Nevertheless both fear and violence are very human realities; and one thing that we can be sure is that banning guns from the general populace will not rid this 21st century of either human fear or violence.
We know violence is sometimes used for rational ends, such as calculated war, calculated terror, and even criminal enterprise. It can be semi-rational as means of game and gambit. Yet force and coercion exists in many forms, and yet it is true when weapons are actually employed they are seldom interested in negotiation (although they may be more so than some imagine). Guns, like all deadly weapons, are about power—at least the projection of power. Thus guns exist, as deadly as they are, within context of all other forms of political and social power—including various forms of coercive law and political tyranny, and types of public suasion, including those who scream for political correctness and common sense, and all realm of the humanly possible. [Yet we note common sense is not so common and the truly political is seldom correct.]
Political control of one’s right to employ any form of force or power is always within a large political and social context. For example, coercive control happens when political forces legally destroy a person’s right to privacy, liberty, or right of association (that is without potentially being spied on), as when all manner of Constitutional laws are ignored as literally shattered by actual bureaucratic practices. Changes likes these within our society, are also forms of violence, of which this American nation is very much besieged. And unfortunately the perpetrators are the very politicians who swore an oath to protect our American Constitutional Rights. These many realities, and more worthy of a new Declaration of Independence, perpetrated by corrupted manner of government are especially bad omen for the majority of people of this nation.
It is within this context, that we ask American parents, who want and expect to raise their children in safe neighborhoods and schools, we all step back and look at a larger picture of how Americans respect, or disrespect, much of the rest of the world (as to what forms of real politics and business practices actually play out), in international environments on the ground, and whether we are being protective of foreigners’ safety. There is a mental health psychology in every society between the balance of what a given society claims to respect as sacred and what it actually respects as sacred—including habits of rationalization toward people in general (here and abroad); and when there is much hypocrisy within that balance, that society can suffer from side affects of disrespect within even as it worries about blowback from without.
Perhaps it is time someone suggested it is unfortunate that parents, of all the millions of millions of “willing-to-be” parents throughout the world, have “not” philosophically found enough wisdom to realize giving birth to a life on this planet is a very precarious enterprise (especially given humanity’s nature, his history, and his enormous capacity for cultural and religious delusion (such as his exceptionalism and divine missions), as well as his propensity to create and believe propaganda, indulge passions and prejudices like hatred, etc., including his historical propensity to violence, and all manner of rationalization to justify such violence, ought give any potential parent pause. Why have there been so few radicals asking why do so many parents assume kids are going to be happy to even be born into this world with all its crazy and serious issues? Perhaps it would be better if the entire human race realized a very practical goal would be to “not” have children in the first place and just let humans go extinct?
This question is not simply a tactic to change the topic from gun violence in schools to the wisdom of parenting in general, because there is something to be said about all manner of presumptions parents and people assume about any society or the world. Why, for example, would a sane person want to be born into a world that already has thousands of nuclear weapons, hundreds that could go off in a short time, not to mention all the other many megatons of ammunition and weaponry the world now possesses? Or why would a sane person want to be born into a world in which there is expectation of major conflicts between various nations and civilizations over various limited but highly regarded resources? Or why would a sane person want to be born into a world, in which people are expected to be self-supporting and yet there are fewer and fewer jobs that pay a salary allowing one to live semi-comfortably (especially when more people are born versus engineers’ ability to robotize and mechanize work)? Why would a sane person want to be born into a world there is ever any kind of crime? Why would a sane person want to be born into a world in which collectives of peoples are literally murdering their environment, etc.? (There could be a far longer list of these kinds of questions.)
Instead children are born without their consent, and then are acculturated by various forms of righteous and nationalist dogma, such as mans’ inevitable right to life and dominion over everything else (by no less than some God-figure). Meanwhile few dare suggest to be born might be more a curse than a blessing—because one is taught (brainwashed) that life is inevitably a sacred gift. And yet cultures can treat the world and all objects (including humans as commodities) as if nothing is sacred (in any true sense) despite all the lip service. Can it be sacred for the human race to continue to procreate and use the world’s resources until there are limits to what lifestyles will be possible—that is while we are deluded into thinking our special form of religio-laissez-faire-capitalism for the wealthy can never fail to deliver to all our consumer-presumption needs? Is there not something violent about this kind of ignorance? Whereas writers on the left continue to presume and act as if there will be always be enough wealth production to guarantee every form of human rights (no matter how big the human population and its insatiable appetites). While I am usually on the left side of the continuum I now find more and more sellout by leftist of the middle and I do not feel I can trust leftist anymore.
This is the beginning of “our” collective mental illness—an unquestioned assumption for enterprising Homo sapiens to own a right to heaven on earth (at least for the chosen and the wealthy—or even with our collapsing middle class in which consumers use a full one quarter of the world’s material resources and energy supply) as if people, at least here in the U.S., can continue to presume an unending supply of food, housing, entertainment, with a strong currency, and all manner of living in secure and beatific quarters?
Obviously a sane society should expect to have safe schools and neighborhoods. But maybe part of the problem is not as much mentally deranged people occasionally gaining access to guns—as some government-expansionists would have it—that now begs reason to scrutinize all mental health records of every American citizen (within all their inevitable subjectivity of opinion—which is what medical opinion ultimately consists) which is part of their “unstated” push for more gun control—that is more bureaucracy for classifying Americans by DNA, mental health records related to political propensities within a police state apparatchik).
But maybe we should look at the sanity of the Christian sheeple, so willing to corral into their own confinement, first? One of the outcomes of religion seems to be to condition people into having an excess of trust for authority (from one savior or another).
Regarding the Newtown school shooting in Connecticut, one rational response to controlling who has access to guns would be to create and enforce legislation that makes gun owners more responsible for locking up their weapons in their own homes so people who should not be playing with them don’t have access to them. Perhaps Nancy Lanza should be held more responsible for her son, who had some personality disorder, having access to her guns?
Something seldom broached in the U.S. is the proven connection between episodes of humiliation and violence (see Thomas J. Scheff’s Emotions and Violence: Shame and Rage in Destructive Conflicts and also his Bloody Revenge: Emotions, Nationalism, and War). Americans have started to acknowledge bullying practices kids deal with at schools but it took a fairly long time (meanwhile some Americans are not at all shy about using ways to embarrass and humiliate others as a form of psychological brutality).
But if most Americans actually understood the main message of Thomas Scheff’s books they would have to question American and Israeli foreign policy because it seems we actually use tactics of humiliation to increase violent blowback—that thus allows the military and intelligence apparatus to beef up their budgets and power in order to deal with the violence they seem to inspire.
Obviously there was something psychologically going on with Adam Lanza. Guns just don’t go killing people by themselves. Perhaps he had some kind of humiliating experience with his mother or that school. This could be important to know. And maybe cultures can be mentally ill just like individuals can be? Yet of the hundreds of reports created on various matters of national security—how many analyze the sanity of the people of nations (or even presume to be able to do so if it were reasonably possible)? Maybe one perpetrator is culture itself (even if it is part of this culture’s assumption to blame the individual and ego)?
In our mass-media-driven culture there is always some kind of imminent fear (that the masses, via the media, are allowed to relate). Mainstream media constantly plays us a daily diet of crime, violence and sexual crime story, day in and day out, giving their many viewers the impression that no one is every safe, and that every stranger is potentially violent or some kind of offender. This is part of how a society can break down into atomized selves with no sense of person power. And since big cities likely have one murder a day to shove onto TV viewers the many are constantly reminded of their supposed and excessive vulnerability (even if less that one millionth of the population behaves in egregious ways). As news companies feel they must focus more on local news they also choose to focus on sensational crime—and because they know it sells more advertising and gets more viewers. Yes the media is invested in crime stories because people watch it (and it is something they can viscerally understand). “If it bleeds it leads” is not just some journalist idiom.
With 350 million people in this nation, and instant communications, there will always be horrendous crimes to keep people reminded about the extremist criminal nature of humanity, to constantly reinforce the impression that one cannot trust people, and that we need more and more prisons, guards, and longer prison sentences, and that we should constantly opt for fewer freedoms for the sake of security. The Police State and fascism starts with conditioning the human mind, as fear is the terrorist’s tactic. Yes that is correct—the mainstream media can drive fear frenzies to motivate people to want to change the laws of this country to actually make them more and more repressive.
They can use deceptive forms of statistics, such as announcing: “…Every 20 seconds a woman is assaulted in the United States…” versus viewers doing the math. Presume then 100 million women in the U.S., and 180 “20 second frames/hour” (times) 24 hours to equal 6,360 assaults against women daily. Divide 100,000,000 women by 6,630 assaults to get approximately 1 assault for every 15,700 women. This second form of statistical presentation seems less alarming (and we are not sure what the term ‘assault’ all includes). This is not arguing numbers of any sort should be countenanced, but still there are deliberate attempts by various special interest groups, and the media to influence how people think and feel, using alarmist statistics as illusive deception into manipulating people to think more crimes are going on than what is true (because few people actually sit down and do the math—and not math-phobic women). Then come their mobilized protests of righteous indignation about America’s need for more forms of draconian legislative measures.
Why are people in one of the world’s most violent countries, with the biggest arsenal of weaponry and military weapon sales, and ownership of intimidating quantities of weapons of mass destruction, and a long history of propping up dictators and death squads around the world, constantly complaining about “their” innocence and victimization within their own country, that is when chaos breaks out occasionally on the home front, meanwhile have too little activist concern about all manner of violence going on in other parts of the world—including forms of mass murder? What realities do we need to be thinking about as far as an individual’s right to the power of weapon versus government behavior in this exceedingly complicated (and corrupt) world? And how can you possibly escape thinking about one without thinking about the other?
It is naïve to think that the Unites States lives in a vacuum, that there is no relationship between our foreign policy, our corporate culture, our government’s actual behavioral practice (forget the rhetoric) and levels of crime. It may not be a direct one to one relationship but it likely exist. To discuss guns is to talk about horrific war, corruption, and all manner of potential repression (such as torture). Gun control, rightly, is an extremely political subject. Many, many peoples have been killed with guns, and other weapons of warfare, in “many” parts of the world over the last centuries and decades.
And yet there is something “more” dangerous than weapons and that is politics itself (that history reminds us over and over again). While there are new expanding technological capacities, human nature stays much the same as ever ready for moral depravity. Guns do “not” exist in a vacuum—they are artifacts built for and by a corrupt species of creature. Those who believe in some kind of socialist Utopia leveraged on an excess of trust are deceiving themselves, such as by thinking common people will never need protection from their own government.
Michael Moore was correct in his recent speech after Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, at Beacon Theatre in NYC, in which he basically agreed with the NRA on the point “people” kill: not guns, but then offered his modification: “…Americans kill … that is what we do…” referring to, for example, to five ongoing U.S. wars, etc. If Michael Moore is a bleeding heart liberal he still understands violence can happen because of the decisions made on Wall Street that impoverish middle class and rural Americans (and urban homeless). He knows violence comes in many forms that don’t sound loud or seem bloody, but can be equally devastating in their effects on people, such as by lost jobs and homes that sometimes also leads to suicide and other tragedies and problems.
What we Americans need to asking ourselves (within the context of many complicated realities) is, should we be banning dangerous weapons for the common man while our too-often law-defying government stockpiles them along side mountains of ammunition? UPI did a story in March on the Department of Homeland Security order for 450 million rounds of 40 caliber bullets (hollow point—killers) from ATK Security and Sporting Group of Anoka Minnesota worth million contract. (Google “40 caliber bullet wound image” to see this bullet’s capacity for violence that can be used in assault rifles.) There are only 350 million Americans—so smart people are asking “Why this huge order by a ‘new’ internal Police State department that has engaged in more and more encroachment against American civil liberties and freedoms?”
And yet this is only part of the story—there were actually 1.6 billion bullets ordered with various companies (see “If Obama is opposed to guns, why did his administration just purchase 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition and sniper rounds?” at:
Apparently some political elites of this corrupted U.S. political and economic system are worried about internal rebellion and they are planning for violent crackdowns. They would like to ban weapons from common Americans? We know things are turbulent as many people of several states want to secede from the nation (and if you have really been paying attention to “real” news found on the Internet you can’t blame them—because even if there are some wacky ideas floating around, and equally some reflecting unrealistic nostalgia, there are also plenty of areas of real and serious concern about government corruption and potential repression). People who want to prevent Americans from owning weapons of a civil war stature—in case there is ever a need for civil war—ought to be explaining why we should trust this government—as opposed to them jumping on the bandwagon for more Police State Security?
What we The People “now” need is a thorough analysis of just how much the federal government, especially by the DHS has increased its police state apparatus within all our states, and local counties and cities, so we can begin to understand this hegemonic Leviathan that has been silently amassing. This includes not only everything that has actually happened because of the Patriot Act (as limiting personal liberty and privacy); but all related legislative acts like the National Defense Authorization Act and its Military Use of Force Act assumptions (that allows for military control and lockup of people suspected of aiding terrorism here within our nation); but also broadening of FISA and NSA powers; and other disclosures like Dana Priest and William Arkin “Top Secret America” reporting series in Washington Post back in the summer of 2010; or the more recent December 2012 report in the Wall Street Journal about illicit spying by the National Counter-Terrorism Centers. The amount of legal changes and illicit behavior by this government, that will not give up its assumed right to own force, is staggering, and much under the pretext of opportunity when people are willing to submit to more control as they feel terrorized.
This is why any banning of guns (or other Constitutional rights) here in the United States must be understood within these recent radical changes that have happened especially since 9/11. Should we The People “just” trust our government, as we trusted U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives with their Patriot Act that they “never” read or wrote (as it was railroaded into law while Americans were feeling their fears, vulnerabilities and passions from 9/11)? There were highly motivated political forces “ready” to capitalize on the terrorism of 9/11 (and they did). Equally we must understand some reactions to terrorist events (irrespective of who responsible) are premeditative calculations for political reasons that have little to do with the actual offending violence—to take advantage of those who cannot or will not think things through clearly and thoroughly (and wisely).
Perhaps “you” trust the American government and various special interest forces that basically run this country in one manner or another? Personally I do not trust the American government, and many of our elective representatives, or perennial career employees of some executive departments (who do not run for office), to look out for the rights and liberties of citizens. If you thoroughly study America’s foreign policy over the last decades, and if you are honest and sincere in your research, you cannot possibly conclude the Washington D.C. Establishment should be trusted in any major way—especially in relationship to giving up your 2nd Amendment right to own guns (your only and last defense against their possible tyranny).
No doubt, by far, most government employees are decent, law-abiding citizens worthy of respect. But this does not counter the reality that some in strategic positions of power are far more susceptible to politics, dishonesty and crime than are the majority. These are the people we need to be concerned, such as their planning for police responses to civil unrest for such possibilities as economic collapse and other disrupting truths.
This government (and especially both major political parties and their lobby cronies), if not thoroughly corrupt, is still too corrupt—including its capacity to violate human rights. Banning weapons here today or in the near future could be the equivalent of giving Mafia thugs your last weapons. It could be paramount to suicide or worse, as lock up in concentration camps whenever Martial Law is declared, or any move based on preventing riot, because they actually have psychopaths employed in The Beltway (such as in influential Neo-Con think-tanks, but not limited to influential policy centers, who would gladly send your kids to war on false pretenses (as they have already done with many American parents’ kids).
This is The Establishment’s blowback paranoia. For example they know military personnel coming back from stints in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc., that some now know they were lied to, and so suspect some of these men and women are angry and possibly dangerous. They don’t want revolution and justice served. This is to say they don’t want some of the criminals at the top of the pecking order hanged here the way Saddam Hussein was hanged. And this is equally why there have been continuous attempts, via the U.S. Congress, to control more and more Internet freedoms (old time Congress people know things).
Truths have been slowly infiltrating to the masses about the lies fed (lies about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq from an axis-of-evil, that is the Neo-Con/ Oil Industry/ Military Industrial Complex investor class conspirators) but also important affiliates in the media like Judith Miller and David Sanger of the New York Times (not to mention Rupert Murdock and his filth of twisted ambition). Yes media’s lapdog involvement of going along with Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith’s Pentagon infiltration, establishing their own Office of Special Plans OSP to plant “alternative Chalibi lies” as supposedly alternative intelligence, is too big a story to summarize in one article (and is already documented).
Suffice it to say, the Second Amendment, is not about sport hunting (superficial red herring), not primarily about your right to defend yourself from criminals (which is certainly a topic worthy of debate especially when crazy shooters act as terrorists), but rather the more important reason that every citizen has a right to own guns to protect themselves from corrupt forms of tyrannical government (that is their employees as instigated Police State Department who might engage various levels of harassment and oppression). This is what our founding fathers understood—that all forms of government are corruptible—and when they are so, are powerfully corrupt and violent.
No government ever—no matter how much naïve trust by blind patriotism exist—should be trusted to the point citizens just hand over their right to defend themselves from those in power. ALL forms of government are corruptible, and so are ALL forms of institution, including the news media, and even religions are corruptible—or at least their megaphones and personalities can be used to deceive citizens into being too trusting as to hand even “more” power over to the few who also control strategic resources.
Americans need a new Declaration of Independence. We need to make some historical sense. We Americans cannot give these people, or their spokespeople, or other wealthy and influential tyrants, the right to ban our guns, elect our leaders, or make our laws. Currently there is a smear campaign going on to destroy Chuck Hagel’s chance to become Secretary of Defense because he has not been ass-kissing enough to right-wing Zionists who think they should dictate our foreign policy. Many of our own elected officials would rather treasonously betray Hagel’s determination of putting American concerns before Israel’s.
Too many of our leaders are the least trustworthy people to listen or debate on the matter of gun control (including senators like Diane Feinstein—a woman who is clearly an insider within our corrupt foreign policy and who also has a permit to carry a weapon). Her life and biography may be complex and worthy but even her supposed attempt to kill the military’s right to detain Americans if suspected of aiding terrorists amounted to little more than subordination to the military authority (and of course her claimed rhetoric did not pass anyway as more show than anything).
Senator Paul Wellstone (a left-wing Jewish American) was assassinated, via an airplane crash, shortly before there was serious debate on whether the U.S. should attack Iraq. The Iraq War happened because Neo-Cons like William Kristol (a right wing Likud Israeli-firster with a screw American goyim attitude) helped push lies that had Americans fighting Israel’s enemies, such as Saddam Hussein, etc. Their whole plan was to have Christian countries (as Nato and U.S.) go to war with Muslim countries primarily for the benefit of one Zionist country, in a decades-long series of wars called the Clash of Civilizations (book by Samuel Huntington). And our government and the news media covered up Paul Wellstone’s murder and his subsequent absence of debating attacking Iraq. Axis-of-evil NeoCons convinced the other two axis of evil, oil and military industrial complex investors, that attacking Israel’s enemies like Iraq, Syria, and Iran was in all three’s best interests (and so there are still feeding us lies today).
Meanwhile U.S. Congress is creating “their” right to read our email (and all our communication—as already ongoing). They can already know almost anything they want about us. And yet we are supposed to trust these people who have already violated our rights in many ways?
They have spent enormous amounts of tax revenue to engage in unnecessary and unwise wars primarily designed to benefit certain industries and political blocks (but not the majority of American people). Yet seldom do these “violence” budget items for special operations and drone programs get any hostility on the part of debates about a fiscal cliff?
Diane Feinstein, our latest savior (oh and since she is a woman she is somehow less hawish), is smack in the middle of our corrupted policies including allowing telephone and Internet companies to spy on us. She is a significant player in our current U.S. foreign policy that kills people every day, over and over and over again (not to mention torturing people—and quite frankly many people would rather be shot to die quickly than to be slowly tortured). Therefore Feinstein is too much like a dumb Madeleine Albright saying in a 60 Minutes interview with Leslie Stahl when question about 500,000 Iraqi children dead because of U.S. long-term sanctions on Iraq, whether she as then Secretary of State thought it worth it, with her infamous “…it was a difficult decision but we thought it was worth it (supposedly punishing Saddam Hussein—a man the CIA previously helped put in power and supplied weapons when they were at war with Iran). Albright was not stupid because of what she said but because of her whole back-ass-ward way of thinking (as insider). Saddam Hussein only became the devil after he kicked Western oil companies out of Iraq because they wanted too much of the cut (before that while he was actually committing atrocities the U.S. media and State Department was pretty much quiet). And what about the depleted uranium that will be inflicting medical harm for many years? Or what about the Iraq infrastructure destroyed as war crimes (and deliberate humiliation)?
So if we lived in a sane and reputable country of some modicum of nobility and probity, radical gun control might be an important, front-burner issue—but we don’t live in that kind of country. We live in a country of enormous disparity, delusion, and greed. More importantly we live in a country in which we have few intellectuals who we can trust (few who are cynical and sophisticated enough to understand the abyss of long-tern potential of political repression that could come to exist—especially without peoples’ right to any form of power). This country too could evolve into a Stalinist camp that wreaks havoc on the masses of people by fascist and militarist might (read the damn Soviet x-gulag prisoner that wrote the book).
Jesse Ventura is right and the sooner the rest of our nation and his group of the special force figure this out the better we all are.
Report this post as:
by MK ULTRA; False flag attack on liberty!
Friday, Dec. 28, 2012 at 12:36 AM
The truth sucks.
There are more mentally unstable people being lined up to attack civilians in a CIA campaign called MK ULTRA.
If not guns then bombs. If not bombs then germs. Currently guns are the easist method, though the MK ULTRA attacks will continue with other weapons available.
Corrections to the corporate media myths;
Mentally ill people may be unstable, though they are not stupid!
It is possible for mentally ill people to figure out how to make bombs and breed germs if the easy access to guns are taken away.
MK ULTRA subjects are mentally ill people who are specifically targeted by CIA opertives (gang stalking) who use harrassment, directed energies and other methods to literally drive the unstable mentally ill person "off the cliff".
Not all mentally ill people will make good MK ULTRA subjects, there are several factors that CIA opertives use to select an MK ULTRA subject for termination ("going over the cliff").
The purpose of the domestic CIA MK ULTRA program is to induce hysteria in the general public and remove guns from the hands of the civilian population, thus ensuring less threats to the establishment system caves in from it's own weight.
Another MK ULTRA subject was James Holmes, the Aurora movie theater shooter;
Susanne Posel writes;
"James Holmes, the Batman shooter , was an intern at the Salk Institute of Biological Studies.
One of the mind control studies conducted at the Salk Institute, was inquiries into neurological activation and inactivation with regard to behavioral manipulation in monkeys.
With the injection of an adeno-associated virus (AAV1), visual impairment and suggestive behavior was confirmed.
These monkeys could be given suggestions that controlled their ability to perform physical and emotional functions. While this study is experimental, it is recommended that further study be conducted to know the wide range of effects and usefulness.
In 2006, Holmes was so impressive to those monitoring his progress that he was given laboratory experiments that would be under his oversight.
While at Salk, Holmes was, according to his resume , the author of computer programs where the utilization of flicker fusion , a form of mind control was being implanted in movies and video games.
Holmes wrote papers , entitled “Temporary Perceptions of Causality” during his time as a student on programming and mind control.
Considering Holmes’ background, it begins to piece together a puzzle that has begged questions about how this man could have committed this egregious act of mass murder for seemingly no reason at all .
Out of character, Holmes, who has no priors or criminal background, dyes his hair red, calls himself the Joker and becomes an automaton who behaves as if he is brainwashed and these acts and motivation has been implanted into his mind from an outside source.
Mind control techniques were perfected with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) use of MKUltra .
In 1977, the US Senate Committee on Health and Scientific Research investigated claims that the CIA were conducting mind control experiments in the 1950s; preformed on unwitting human subjects.
Coincidentally, 16,000 pages of declassified CIA documents were released about MKUltra, the secret project into mind control techniques which ran from 1953 to 1964.
The CIA’s Technical Services Division was to provide the support for MKUltra experiments. They supplied any instruments, biological, disguises, chemicals, drugs, gadgets, that the agents required to conduct their experiments.
The TSS Chemical Division and its director, Sydney Gotlieb is the first head of the MKUltra project. Gotlieb spearheaded the experiments into LSD. Paid college students volunteers were used, as well as incarcerated prisoners.
With the death of Frank Olsen, the CIA had to back off from their overt experiments into mind control and become covert to protect their operations.
The combination of mind control drugs and false flag operations are nearly synonymous with the restriction of freedoms and usurpation of government into the private lives of its citizens. The Holmes, Batman short case is no exception.
Purchases of firearms have been steadily increasing. The mass execution of Americans at the Aurora Theater has opened to the door to conversations about stricter gun controls, while the UN is finishing up their Arms Trade Treaty in New York and Obama is promising to have the votes necessary to ratify the ATT in the US Congress to get a handle on gun purchases and the continued armoring of American citizens.
Holmes apparently lawfully purchased an AR15 assault rifle, 12 gage pump shotgun, and .40 calliber semi-automatic Glock pistol; as well as 6000 rounds of ammunition, body armor and a gas mask.
Since last year, when gun sales skyrocketed, the US government has been monitoring suspicious purchases. This type of purchase by one individual should have set off alarm bells and warning signs.
The Hegelian Dialectic at work here is obvious. The US government is concerned about the American population arming themselves and being able to defend themselves against any violent action by their own government.
The UN and the Obama administration are trying to have personal gun ownership outlawed, but how do they get around the Constitutional Right of the 2nd Amendment?
Problem - Insert false flag psy-op with a pasty under CIA mind control drugs to perform a horrific act that causes a problem.
Reaction - Then create a national debate that is controlled by the mainstream media and implant the necessity to finally gain a foot hold on this Americans being able to own guns problem.
Solution – Restrict the freedoms of the 2nd Amendment with the intent to ultimately eradicate it after the UN’s treaty is ratified in the US Congress by incremental means so that martial law can be used to force Americans into “internment camps” being built across the country under FEMA."
Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page."
IF you read this and are suffering from emotional or mental disturbance, please try to find some way to balance yourself and don't allow the CIA to push you over the cliff with their MK ULTRA psyops attacks!!
Sometimes the safest place is to be non-exsistant to the system.
"I don't exist when you don't see me, I don't exist when you're not here.
What the eye don't see won't break the heart, you can make believe when we're apart, but when you leave I disappear."
Report this post as:
by Bloods and Crips illegaley own guns anyway
Friday, Dec. 28, 2012 at 11:34 AM
The Street Gangs like the Bloods and The Crips, who often do Gun Violence across America, are often Repeat Offenders, who aren't supposed to have Guns in the First Place. Yet they can have access to Uzis, Machine Guns, Handguns, Shotguns, Explosives, Rockets, and Hand Grenades anyway. Gun Control or no Gun Control will not stop them. The same thing can be said about anyone wanting to do Gun Violence. Gun Control Laws will not stop them from obtaining Guns, it will only Disarm The Law Abiding Public, who will in turn be at the Mercy of those who wish to do Gun Violence that much more. You don't think The Cops are going to stop The Bloods and The Crips from obtaining Guns do you? It is Illegal for them not only to have Guns, but also to Sell Drugs to your Children on Schoolgrounds. Yet they do it anyway and here's why. The so called Law Enforcement Community has long been working Hand and Glove with The Bloods and The Crips in The Distribution of Drugs, including The Distribution of Drugs on School Grounds, where Children are the Target. Gun Control will not stop this, simply because Your Cops whom have sworn to Protect and Serve you would rather Take Kickbacks From Drug Dealers then stop them. Though they might decide to go on a Joy Ride on BART or Subways and Induldge in Gun Violence of their own from time to time. On the subject of Sleeper Agents, or Agents who may not know they are Agents, who are Activated by a Trigger known only to their Handlers, it will not stop a Sleeper Agent. His Handlers, be they Intel or Some Sleeper Cell working with Intel, but Networked outside the Intelligence Community, in order to Prevent Discovery, will also not be stopped. If this was planned by a Sleeper Agent activated by some Trigger, then no Gun Law would have stopped this. Incidentally Sleeper Agents have been around since the days of Hassan bin Sabbah, leader of a Secret Society known as the Order of Assassins. His subordinates were experts in Mind Control in their time, able to get their Followers to do any frightening thing they wanted them to. And Modern Intelligence Services have learned from this Fanatical Secret Society, the value of Sleeper Agents. We've come a long way since MK Ultra. Both The CIA and Army Intel invested alot of Money and Time in this Project, in order to Create The Perfect Agent. An Agent who doesn't know he's an Agent. And of course Mind Control which was in the Trial Stage under MK Ultra during the 50's and 60's is now Operational. If someone is using Sleeper Agents to Commit seemingly Random Acts of Gun Violence, then these Agent Moriartey's are obviously doing it for a Reason. And it isn't because they want to Protect and Serve us, but quite the Opposite. They want to Frighten us into Surrendering Weapons in Order to Disarm, the Law Obiding Class, so they will be at the Mercy of Gun Violence that much more. A little extra side note. The CIA is known to be involved in the Importing of Drugs from Latin America to South Asia (including Post 9-11 Aghanistan). So they are also reponsible for the Gun Violence you see the Bloods and The Crips do on a Regular Basis, even though it has long been against the Law for these Street Gangs to Possess these Automatic Weapons, which are to this day used in Gun Violence Across America.
Report this post as:
by Bloods and Crips are CIA Pawns
Saturday, Dec. 29, 2012 at 12:26 AM
Glad to see the Ron Paul haters are still alive and kicking in heads. Now they're calling RP a racist because he speaks the truth about violent street gangs (Bloods, Crips, etc...) exploiting their own communities? Maybe the Ron Paul haters need to understand how the poor wittle gangbangers are actually working directly for the CIA;
Cocaine Importing Agency
Wednesday, March 14, 2012 16:45
"New evidence has surfaced linking the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency to the introduction of crack cocaine into Black neighborhoods with drug profits used to fund the CIA-backed Nicaraguan Contra army in the early 1980s.
This evidence has given credence to long-held suspicions of the U.S. government’s role in undermining Black communities.
According to a series of groundbreaking reports by the San Jose Mercury News, for the better part of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring, comprised of CIA and U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency agents and informants, sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles.
Millions of dollars in drug profits were then funneled to the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense (Nicaraguan Democratic Force), the largest of several anti-Communists commonly called the Contras. The 5,000-man FDN was created in mid-1981 and run by both American and Nicaraguan CIA agents in its losing war against Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, the Cuban-supported socialists who had overthrown U.S.-backed dictator Anastasio Somoza in 1979.
This CIA-backed drug network opened the first pipeline between Columbia’s cocaine cartels and the Black neighborhoods of Compton and Los Angeles, according to the Mercury News.
In time, the cocaine that flooded Los Angeles helped spark a “crack explosion” in urban America and provided the cash and connections needed for Los Angeles’s gangs to buy Uzi sub-machine guns, AK-47 rifles, and other assault weapons that would fuel deadly gang turf wars, drive-by shootings, murders and robberies — courtesy of the U.S. government, according to the article.
“While the FDN’s war is barely a memory today, Black America is still dealing with its poisonous side effects. Urban neighborhoods are grappling with legions of homeless crack addicts. Thousands of young Black men are serving long prison sentences for selling cocaine — a drug that was virtually unobtainable in Black neighborhoods before members of the CIA’s army started bring it into South Central in the 1980s at bargain basement prices,” wrote Mercury News reporter Gary Webb, in the first installment of the shocking series of reports.
Although the Mercury News details the activities of numerous Nicaraguan and American informants and ties involved in the drug-gun trade, three men are cited as key players: Norwin Meneses, a Nicaraguan smuggler and FDN boss; Danilo Blandon, a cocaine supplier, top FDN civilian leader in California, and DEA informant; and Ricky Donnell Ross, a South Central Los Angeles high school dropout and drug trafficker of mythic proportions, who was Mr. Blandon’s biggest customer.
According to the Mercury News article, for the better part of a decade, “Freeway Rick,” as he was nicknamed, was unaware of his supplier’s military and political connections.
But together, the trio was directly and indirectly responsible for introducing and selling crack cocaine as far away as Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Dayton and St. Louis.
Ricky Ross’ street connections, ability to obtain cocaine at low prices and deals that allowed him to receive drugs from Contra-CIA operatives with no money upfront helped him to undercut other dealers and quickly spread crack. He also sold crack wholesale to gangs across the country, said the Mercury News report.
Most of the information surrounding the CIA’s involvement in the crack trade came from testimony in the March drug trafficking trial of Mr. Ross, 36, who, along with two other men were convicted of cocaine conspiracy charges in San Diego.
A federal judge indefinitely postponed Mr. Ross’s Aug. 23 sentencing to grant his lawyer time to try to show that federal authorities misused DEA agent Mr. Blandon to entrap Mr. Ross in a “reverse” sting last year. Mr. Ross could receive life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Records show that Mr. Ross was still behind bars in Cincinnati in 1994, awaiting parole, when San Diego DEA agents targeted him for the reverse sting– one in which government agents provide the drugs and the target provides the cash.
Though Mr. Blandon has admitted to crimes that have sent others away for life, the U.S. Justice Department turned him loose on unsupervised probation in 1994 after only 28 months behind bars and has paid him more than 6,000 since, court records show.
Mr. Blandon’s boss in the FDN’s cocaine operation, Norwin Meneses, has never spent a day in a U.S. prison, even though the federal government has been aware of his cocaine dealings since at least 1974, according to the Mercury News article.
For years, writers, authors, activists, gang members and others have implicated the U.S. government in the deadly crack cocaine-gun trade.
Many have charged the U.S. government with supplying gang members with these tools in an effort to undermine and eradicate the Black community through wanton murder, drug addiction and crime.
Some believe crack did not become an “American problem” until the drug began hitting white neighborhoods and affecting white children.
On Aug. 23, the Los Angeles City Council, responding to pressure by the Los Angeles Chapter of the Black American Political Association of California (BAPAC), asked U.S. Atty. Janet Reno to investigate the government’s involvement in the alleged sale of illegal street drugs in Los Angeles’ Black community to support the CIA-backed Contras.
BAPAC vice chairman Glen Brown told The Final Call that a federal agency monitored by a civilian advisory board is one way the government could investigate the matter because “we can’t have people who are responsible for this investigate themselves.”
BAPAC, a statewide coalition of political activists, has also demanded that the U.S. government provide the necessary funding, materials and labor to rebuild urban areas destroyed by crack cocaine, as well as the necessary medical care, education, counseling, and vocational training to restore shattered lives.
Long-term Los Angeles activists Chilton Alphonse, founder of the Community Youth Sports & Arts Foundation, which aids former gang members, said he briefly assisted Ricky Ross when the drug dealer was paroled from prison inn October 1994, after serving about half of a 10-year prison sentence in Cincinnati in exchange for his testimony against corrupt Los Angeles police detectives.
“He came back to Los Angeles and tried to get his life together,” Mr. Alphonse said. “Rick was a legend in the streets. But he flipped (testified against law enforcement officers). He said they used him to skim money from him.”
Mr. Alphonse was referring to Mr. Ross’s 1991 testimony against Los Angeles Police Department narcotics detectives who had been fired or indicted along with dozens of deputies from the Los Angeles County sheriff’s elite narcotics squads for allegedly beating suspects, stealing drug money and planting evidence.
Mr. Alphonse, who now resides in Alabama, said he has warned for years that the flood of crack cocaine and assault weapons into the Black community was not the doing of the Bloods and Crips.
“Inner city youth don’t have the resources to manufacture cocaine or ship in guns,” Mr. Alphonse said.
In December 1989, while head of the NAACP Los Angeles Chapter, Anthony A. Samad (then Anthony Essex) announced his findings that some Bloods and Crips members had implicated the U.S. government in the ruthless crack and assault weapons trade among Los Angeles street gangs. Mr. Samad said that he learned this after extensive interviews with gang members housed in Los Angeles County Jail. But he was largely ignored by Black elected officials, he said who sided with law enforcement.
“Gang members charged then that gang rivalry and drug wars were being perpetuated by the police and the government,” said Mr. Samad, who is now president of Samad & Associates, a consulting firm.
Henry Stuckey, of Stop the Violence/Increase the Peace, said that government involvement in community drug trafficking was common knowledge in some circles.
“Obviously African American males didn’t have planes and boats to move the guns and narcotics into the Black community.” Mr. Stuckey said.
Mr. Stuckey said that Black and Latino youths must be appraised of the government’s involvement in order to understand that their communities will continue to be the dumping grounds for guns and drugs unless the youths “do for self.”
“I do think that the blame that was laid on the gangs was wrong,” Mr. Stuckey said. “But I can’t say that it vindicates them for their actions because they had a choice in the matter. (Still) it’s horrible that the government targeted our youth.”
Roland Freeman, a spokesperson for the Los Angeles Chapter of the International Campaign to Free Geronimo Pratt, is a former member of the Black Panther Party. The BPP was targeted and ultimately nullified by FBI counterintelligence programs.
Mr. Freeman said he knows firsthand of the deceit of which the government is capable; a government, he said, that tries to “set itself up as if it’s higher than God when really it’s lower than the devil.”
“(They put) small pox in the Indian’s blankets and gave them fire water,” Mr. Freeman said. “They make drugs available to Blacks and other minorities. It only surprises me that (the CIA) got caught.”
Greed and materialism are the tools used by the CIA to turn young people against their own community. What starts out as survival becomes another competition for wealth and status amongst the gangbangers. When someone like Ron Paul is speaking out against the street gangs he is defending the remainder of the African-american community that has chosen NOT to join in the drug games orchestrated by the CIA.
Greed and materialism is a human trait found in ALL communities, though NOT ALL members of the communities choose this route of self destruction. When "well meaning" liberals defend the street gangs and call RP a racist they are in fact defending materialism and the ongoing CIA campaign to flood the streets with damaging drugs like crack cocaine, meth, etc... with the help of their street gang pawns.
Love of money and materialism leads to street gangs and the CIA knows this. So try to avoid being played for a fool by the CIA...
Love's Gonna Get'cha!!
Report this post as:
by legalize drugs, end gangs
Thursday, Jan. 03, 2013 at 10:03 PM
What about the common sense approach to ending street gang warfare, legalization and decriminalization of drugs, their primary income?
IF the people voted to legalize and/or decriminalize drugs the profit that motivates street gangs like Bloods and Crips is removed and eventually they will cease to exist as gangs and become regular people once again.
The prison-industrial complex profits next from the continued prohibition on drugs, and they are also against legalization. Ironically the politician (Ron Paul) who is being honest about the failure of the "war on drugs" and mainstream advocate of decriminalization is labeled a "racist". However, it is institutional racism to lock people away for possession of any substances they choose to ingest.
We understand enough of human history to find patterns repeating; prohibition fuels the profits of organized crime and gangs both then (alcohol) and now (drugs). Amazing that only a few humans can understand the relationship between then and now, or do more understand and are their voices being suppressed?
"Because of Prohibition, organized crime increased, especially in major cities. Gangsters got richer and more violent as they fought over control of liquor sales and other illegal activities such as prostitution and gambling, which also grew during the 1930s. The public was fascinated by big-city mob bosses who became the subject of newspaper stories and movies. Although they were far from urban speakeasies and gangland crime, rural residents also were fascinated by the underworld activities of mobsters. Gangs and outlaws with names like "Pretty Boy Floyd," "Baby Face" Nelson, Ma and Fred Barker, and Bonnie and Clyde grabbed newspaper headlines. John Dillinger's armed robberies took place mostly in the Midwest, and he was named "Public Enemy Number One."
"The reign of tears is over. The slums will soon be a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corncribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile and children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent."
Reverend Billy Sunday delivered this quotation during a speech at the beginning of prohibition. Many people believed and hoped that prohibition would make the above true. However, as they watched and waited, they realized that nothing was improved, and somehow, things had gotten worse.
The following are statistics detailing how much worse crime got:
Police funding: INCREASED .4 Million
Arrests for Prohibition Las Violations: INCREASED 102+%
Arrests for Drunkenness and Disorderly Conduct: INCREASED 41%
Arrests of Drunken Drivers: INCREASED 81%
Thefts and Burglaries: INCREASED 9%
Homicides, Assault, and Battery: INCREASED 13%
Number of Federal Convicts: INCREASED 561%
Federal Prison Population: INCREASED 366%
Total Federal Expenditures on Penal Institutions: INCREASED 1,000%
"Not only did the number of serious crimes increase, but crime became organized. Criminal groups organize around the steady source of income provided by laws against victimless crimes such as consuming alcohol or drugs, gambling and prostitution. In the process of providing goods and services those criminal organizations resort to real crimes in defense of sales territories, brand names, and labor contracts. That is true of extensive crime syndicates (the Mafia) as well as street gangs, a criminal element that first surfaced during prohibition."
"The contributing factor to the sudden increase of felonies was the organization of crime, especially in large cities. Because liquor was no longer legally available, the public turned to gangsters who readily took on the bootlegging industry and supplied them with liquor. On account of the industry being so profitable, more gangsters became involved in the money-making business. Crime became so organized because "criminal groups organize around the steady source of income provided by laws against victimless crimes such as consuming alcohol. As a result of the money involved in the bootlegging industry, there was much rival between gangs. The profit motive caused over four hundred gang related murders a year in Chicago alone."
Bootleg alcohol is what fueled the work of Organized crime. Most of the men involved in the Mafia or gangs were young immigrants. The business of bootleg alcohol was highly profitable for everyone involved which often fueled the Mafia or gang wars. By the late 1920's more than 1 million gallons of bootleg liquor had been illegally brought into the United States. Most of the alcohol came in either through Canada or from ships that were located just beyond U.S. waters. See Coast Guard Pictures during the Prohibition Era. However, there was alcohol being produced legally in the United States that was also being bootlegged. Most of the alcohol being produced for use in manufacture often ended up being bootlegged. We will look more at bootleg alcohol, speakeasies and other forms of illegal alcohol as we look at life for the average American.
Do humans want to keep making the same mistakes as previous generations or are humans ready to advance beyond their government's telling them "what is best for them"?
Consider not all "drugs" are the same in their effects (positive and negative) and you above all others will have to live with what you do to your own body and mind!!
Report this post as: