San Bernardino Shooting – Yes Andy Richter, It Is About Access to Guns

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: Every agenda at play here. She was in the country on some kind of marriage Visa (immigration reform) and now it seems “authorities” are saying he was in contact every now and again with someone who was being monitored for security reasons so he must have been radicalized (Homegrown Extremist Bill (shuttering the internet)). Mix in gun control and “ISIS” and every major agenda on the wishlist is represented.

—-

Here’s what we know so far:

At a moment in time when the Obama administration desperately wants to impose some form of national “mental hygiene law” in order to regulate who has a right to bear arms and who doesn’t, we suddenly have yet another rash of these mass shootings with no motives.

Obama himself wasted no time in politicizing the event:

President Obama once again called for better background checks and new restrictions on access to guns for people who might pose a danger. “We should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal,” New York Times

Combine that with the fact that they also need to continue to ratchet up public anger toward ISIS™ in order to justify putting troops in harm’s way in places like Syria, Iraq and possibly Yemen…

… and you have the latest mass casualty event in California.

And the suspects, both dead (no trial, no conflicting accounts), just happen to be Muslim… with ties to Saudi Arabia.

“On Wednesday morning, Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, left their 6-month-old daughter with Mr. Farook’s mother, telling her they were going out for a doctor’s appointment, a relative said.

By nightfall, it was clear that was a ruse, as the police said the couple spent the day carrying out a rampage at a social services center that killed at least 14 people before leading officers on a sprawling chase that ended with the two dead in a bloody gunfight in a suburban neighborhood.” New York Times

Once again, there is no motive.

Investigators were puzzling over the motives, and there were conflicting accounts of what led to the shooting. New York Times

Witnesses have stated Syed put his coat on the back of his chair and simply walked out of the holiday party he was attending with the co-workers he had known for years.

But that story doesn’t suit the police, so they changed it claiming he left in a huff, upset with someone over something. But even they don’t pretend to have a motive at this point.

Then they came back. Or at least, someone did. It would be impossible to positively identify the couple at the scene, since they were dressed in all black tactical gear… and wearing masks.

The attackers drove up in a dark S.U.V. to a complex of buildings run by the Inland Regional Center, spent “several minutes” shooting inside one of the buildings, and then fled, Chief Burguan said. They wore masks and body armor, he said.

“They were dressed and equipped in a way that indicates they were prepared,” he said at a news conference about three hours after the shooting. “They came prepared to do what they did, as if they were on a mission.” New York Times

The weapons were the usual suspects: hand guns and what’s called “assault” weapons. The ever present AR-15 was one of them. They also supposedly left some explosive devices behind, a total of three of them.

A bag believed to belong to the shooters was found in the conference room. Inside, investigators found three rudimentary explosive devices packed with black powder and rigged to a remote-controlled toy car. The remote for the toy car was found inside the SUV, a law enforcement official said. CNN

It’s important to note, CNN reported that though two of the guns belonged to the couple and were legally registered, the assault rifles appear to belong to someone else.

Two of the firearms have been traced back to them; they were purchased legally. Two rifles were purchased — also legally — by someone else, possibly a roommate, an official said. Authorities don’t think that person had anything to do with the attack. CNN

After the shooting (with someone else’s rifles) the suspects left and like the drive-by terrorists from Paris, where able to leave the scene without being chased by law enforcement.

As the suspects fled in a black sport utility vehicle, large parts of the city were paralyzed throughout the day… Late in the afternoon, dozens of heavily armed police officers in tactical gear descended on a residential neighborhood in pursuit of the attackers. New York Times

The shootings began around 11am. After the requisite “shelter in place” lock-down order for the entire city, someone called police with a “tip” about where they could find the suspects. It was a home in a residential district, not their home mind you.

There was supposedly a chase from that location to where the final shootout occurred.

The gunfight began around 3pm… some 4 hours after the shooting took place.

This time-line is available, here.

CNN reported that the black SUV had Utah license plates. Why would a resident of California have Utah plates?

While they were there, a black SUV with Utah plates passed by slowly, then sped up and raced off, a law enforcement official close to the investigation said.

A police cruiser pursued it. CNN

Syed Rizwan Farook reportedly had a good job and had been there for 5 years. He made $70,000 a year by some accounts.

He and Tashfeen Malik, his wife, have a new baby 6-months old. It was their first.

They supposedly met online at something called iMilap.com .  That website bills itself as a dating and marriage site for people with disabilities.

Was Syed Rizwan Farook mentally disabled? If that is true, then he would certainly fall into the category of patsies targeted by the FBI, set up with a “roommate” handler and then used in a manufactured false flag event like so many we have seen before created by the FBI, now wouldn’t he?

His profile on that website says he has no disabilities, but if you read what he wrote, it certainly sounds like he has one (remember, this guy had a college degree and grew up in the States):

In a short narrative, he described himself as hailing from a “religios [sic] but modern family of 4, 2 girls 2 boys.”

“I work for county as health, safety and envorimental [sic] inspector. Enjoy working on vintage and modern cars, read religios books, enjoy eating out sometimes travel and just hang out in back yard doing target pratice with younger sister and friends.” Daily Caller

farook

She is from Saudi Arabia. Both are Muslim. They traveled there recently. I am sure that will be the ISIS™ tie-in they need so desperately.

Reports of a third person being with them and arrested at the scene are dropping down the old memory hole, but it did happen.

The chief said a third person fled the scene and was taken into custody, but the police did not know his role, if any. A police officer was wounded in the shootout and was being treated at a hospital for non-life-threatening injuries. New York Times

Burguan also said police detained a third suspect who was seen running away, but they do not yet know if he was involved. He said one police officer sustained non-life-threatening injuries. NPR (H/T AnonX)

Handler perhaps? The person driving the vehicle while the husband and wife were drugged and in the back seat? Did he park the car there and run away leaving them inside? Was it the same guy who just happens to be the one who the assault rifles are register to? Who knows…. because authorities aren’t saying.

California just happens to have some of the strictest gun laws in the country. The strictest by some measures. When they say he bought these weapons legally, what they mean is he bought them prior to the ban on assault weapon purchasing. People who bought theirs before the new law was passed are allowed to keep them. So much for that, huh?

California has the strictest gun laws in the nation, according to the most recent report card by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. It is among a handful of states that ban sale or possession of many assault weapons, including the most common models, although people who owned those firearms before they were banned are allowed to keep them. It was not known where and how the suspects obtained their weapons. New York Times

San Bernadino is an economically destitute little town. Hit hard by the designed economic collapse of 2008, the city recently filed for bankruptcy making themselves ready for the inevitable public/private privatization model and a new city “manager” to come in and chop it up for the fire-sale.

San Bernardino is a city of more than 200,000 people that has struggled in recent years as the city filed for bankruptcy, residents suffered a high rate of home foreclosures, and the commercial downtown deteriorated. The population has swelled over the past generation with immigrants from Latin America, Asia and the Middle East, drawn by proximity to Los Angeles, and housing that is affordable. New York Times

The shooting took place at a “nonprofit” agency. Privatized public services, don’t ya know.

The all-important celebrities have taken to Twitter to call for gun control.

Yes Andy, it is about access to guns, isn’t it?

—-

Please help keep us up and running if you can.

Speaking truth ABOUT power since 2007

(For my mailing address, please email me at RSCdesigns@tampabay.rr.com)

output_95f0q7

47 Responses

  1. Playbook…. Same… MO… Same… Dead patsies… Same… Propaganda… Same… Cover up… Same…

    So much so that even your article, which is another lightning fast Scott Creighton bullshit destroyer in its own right, also feels the same…

    At this point, these shootings are becoming similar to watching a crappy magic show by a crappy magician, who’s got cards sticking out of his sleeves, repeatedly doing the same trick, and the audience still falling for it every damn time….

    “They” seem determined to have O pass a gun control law before the end of his term… It will be his legacy… And it will happen…

    And all the bonus memes like ISIS, refugees, mental health, etc. will be piled up on the gun control “conversation” by the scriptwriters of psyopistan…

    This is all so depressing!!!

    Thank you for the article, Scott.

    Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called “The Pledge”. The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course… it probably isn’t. The second act is called “The Turn”. The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you’re looking for the secret… but you won’t find it, because of course you’re not really looking. You don’t really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn’t clap yet. Because making something disappear isn’t enough; you have to bring it back. That’s why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call “The Prestige”.

    The Pledge (2001)

    • your comment reminds me of a couple things. The first being that ridiculous “magic” show where some dickhead goes to some business somewhere and performs his “magic” in front of phony everyday people. All they do is stop action editing. The trick is having fake audience members ACT like they are shocked by the “magic”. It’s fucking stupid. Dumb as crap. Yet there it is. It’s called the “Carbonaro Effect” and the “effect” is simply stopping the film, sticking something in his hand, and having the equivalent of Crisis Actors pretend to be amazed. And just like these mass casualty events here in psyopstan (I like that by the way) it’s as obvious as the nose on your face.

      The other thing I was reminded of is an article I wrote years ago about these events. I called it the Prestige and based it on the same film you are quoting.

    • and guess what? there was a training exercise taking place nearby. It’s like a cookie-cutter formula for these guys.

    • Another thing that is the same is the fake sincerity and the script used by Shepard Smith (CNN) when introducing the latest fakery. It’s akin to a hypnotist’s schpiel. I wonder if it actually is one…

      …And now, you’re feeling sleepy. Your eyelids are becoming heavy. Breaking news this morning out of blah, where we’re hearing that a shooter or shooters has…

    • I don’t see the masses falling for the blowback’s opportunists. I do see the revenge attacks reaching a tipping point where the Empire collapses from overstretch and polarization which paralyses within.

  2. I find it very hard to believe that anyone gives any credence to these nonsensical fiction stories or anything that comes from the mainstream media/CIA for that matter.

  3. And the wizard steadily turns his little crank, and instructs his guards to shoot the Lion, melt down the Tinman for scrap, burn the Scarecrow for heat, and put Dorothy in a cage for inciting terrorism. Toto is left to wander aimlessly as a stray.

  4. Scott, both of the patsies were Pakistani descent. The dude was born in the states.

    • thanks. I will look into that. I distinctly heard CNN this morning saying she was from Saudi Arabia and that they had traveled there recently. I will look into it. thanks

  5. Thanks for continuing the great work, Scott.
    You’re one of the few voices out there willing to expose these charades.
    I’m curious about your thoughts on the NRA, and how they fit into these psyop campaigns.
    It seems to me that they’re controlled opposition, who if they had any backbone would actually call attention to the fraudulent nature of these events.
    Instead, they push their members in to the arms of Republican party politicians, and serve the necessary media narrative of “left-right” paradigm.

  6. Just to follow up on my previous post.
    These type of events actually generate great profits for the NRA because of the rightful fear that there could be a gun grab, but they also enhances their bottom line by proposing a solution of more gun ownership for citizens, in order to combat the “bad guys” with guns.
    I’d be curious if you think I’m way off base, but it looks like these staged events serve as big business for all parties involved, including controlled opposition.
    Even if the power elite get their beloved gun control/ mental hygiene laws, the NRA can still profit enormously by launching a campaign to amend such legal provisions.
    The game never ends, both sides play on the same team.

    • I don’t think gun control is the desired end. The desired end is FEAR. Ask yourself: What is the overriding quality of a sheep? Why is it so easily controllable using one dog?

      • I get that, but the fear is the tactic used to create a climate conducive to push forward an agenda. Disarming the public certainly fits the model for an agenda that’d be favorable to their desired outcome of a totalitarian police state.

        • Ask the Palestinians what life is like when you are unable to defend yourself.
          After I read your first post, I tried to contact the NRA and see what their position was on these hoaxes. I was unable to contact them by phone or e-mail. I suspect the ‘leaders’ of the NRA have been bought off with a whole lot of money.

        • I think that’s an idea that itself has been pushed. I’ve been hearing it forever. I prefer to think that the ‘debate’ is simply a device for keeping the “shootings” at the forefront of the fearful mind. Also, the ‘fact’ that everyone has an arsenal of high-powered weapons in his basement adds to the fear. They could have a totalitarian police state tomorrow, if they wanted one. INDIVIDUALS with guns couldn’t do anything about it. In fact, individuals with guns are already jumping through totalitarian hoops with the rest of us, on a daily basis.

          My rule of thumb is: If an idea is being sold to you, and you seem to have already accepted that idea, and you don’t know when you accepted it or why, kick it out and begin a proper critical thinking process in relation to it.

          I think things like “gun control agendas” are red herrings we face as we amble sleepily towards control by indoctrination and estrogen, etc. What use will your gun be if you no longer have the balls to pull the trigger?

          • they clearly have a gun control agenda. they don’t want to ban them outright, they just want to be able to decide who gets to buy them and who doesn’t. And who gets to keep the ones they have and who doesn’t. The broader picture is getting people to accept the idea that some panel somewhere gets to decide and when they do, it’s for the best. Once they can do that, they take it to the next level. Decide who gets to work and who doesn’t. Who gets to eat, buy a home, marry, basically anything. And of course, they always know best. And that little thing called the Bill of Rights is completely meaningless. Hell, they are already saying it’s archaic. In the end, not only will people agree that they always know best, but they will steadily work to see the world they way they tell them to. Even more than they are doing now. You have to look at the criteria they will use to deny people this fundamental right which will be based on HOW THEY THINK. “mental hygiene” laws? Once you can take away their right to bear arms because of how they think, they next step is to separate them from society… re-educate them.. disappear them?

            • I don’t know who “they” are, but it seems to me that they already have the powers you fear they seek to have. As soon as you’re born, you are allocated a slave certificate. After that THEY do decide whether you work or not, and what you work at. You may not have realised it at the time, but you were directed, at least AWAY from certain career paths when you were in high school. That’s why you’re not in those careers. Nothing to do with intellect or aptitude; everything to do with having the wrong attitude, in their view. That’s what exams are. They test your ability to accept being told what IS. Depending on your ability in that regard, the teachers work to pigeonhole you for the future. The thing people don’t understand is that the pigeonholes are not labelled “Doctor”, “Lawyer”, “Soldier”, “Plumber”. They’re labeled “Not doctor”, etc.

              THEY don’t decide who eats, but they do decide what you eat. They don’t decide who marries, but they do decide what a marriage is worth (i.e., nothing). They don’t decide who buys a home, but they do decide who keeps one.

              Make no mistake, THEY already control every step you take. That they’d control which loonies possessed a gun might be one of the benefits of that system. Unfortunately, that’s not something they could ever control. Nor would they ever want to or need to.

              The main fallacy of “the right to bear arms” is that it’s written right up there with “the right to watch your neighbour being dragged off, or burned alive, and think he probably had it coming… Oh! Monday Night Football!” No amounts of guns will ever mitigate the amount of individual fear and selfishness.

              Go to a mall or anywhere else people gather, find a bench, sit down and observe them. That ‘militia’ isn’t going to save you. The only thing you can hope to do is become an expert parasite on the system. That’s the only viable means of attack-oriented self-defence.

  7. One has to wonder what they are thinking or can they really be this inept….These FF’s dont help their cause. 185,345 requests for gun purchase on last friday…ALONE! Thats enough weapons for 3 to 4 divisions….and that number will go way up after this last “Reality Show”. Their fear of us has made them hesitate for years and now they are swinging wildly in desperation, cant get WW3 going so back to the old “Divide and Conquer” right here at home….The best they seem to be able to do is make everywhere they go look like Libya…

  8. “Two rifles were purchased — also legally — by someone else, possibly a roommate, an official said. Authorities don’t think that person had anything to do with the attack.”

    Sure, unnamed innocent people lend two assault rifles to their middle eastern buds, who already have several of their own assault rifles, all the time…who would think there’s anything strange or unwise about that? They probably just never heard that middle eastern people are under any suspicion of anything right now. That makes sense.

    “While they were there, a black SUV with Utah plates passed by slowly, then sped up and raced off.”

    Hey you stupid cops! Here I am! Just try to get me!

    “[I] enjoy just hanging out in back yard doing target practice with younger sister and friends.”

    Backyard target practice…right…the neighbors were all good with that because hearing guns being repeatedly fired by the middle-eastern health inspector next door is totally normal and no cause for alarm – if it’s a health inspector doing it it must be healthy. I’m sure everyone in the neighborhood was totally comfortable having their kids ride their bikes by the house that always has gunfire coming from it – the house with the 6 month old baby and mother inside. No reason to call the police.

  9. Oh, and don’t start thinking that young middle eastern girls and women are not all into guns, because my younger sister and wife are proof that they are. That’s why my wife is OK with all this target practice around the baby.

  10. “The chief said a third person fled the scene and was taken into custody, but the police did not know his role, if any.”

    So, possibly no role, but said to have fled the scene. They’ll find a role for him.

  11. I’m not getting it. Are we supposed to believe that Farook went to the party, left in a huff, got suited up with his wife, grabbed some bombs that they’d prepared earlier, and went back to conduct a shooting rampage? That must have been some description he gave his wife about the argument he’d got into… cos she got pissed in a hurry.

    Who writes these scripts?

    • don’t forget the masks. they did all of that, then put on masks so… what?… no one would know who they were? really?

    • Some reports are now saying some witnesses said that he didn’t get in any argument, but rather just slipped out quietly, and they didn’t notice until they took a group photo later and then noticed he wasn’t there anymore.

      I don’t see any photos or video of the woman who was shot. Was she shot inside the SUV? Has anybody seen any images or heard reports on where the woman was shot?

      Here is some good ABC7 helicopter footage.

    • Oops – I hadn’t finished watching my own clip – near the end they say the other suspect is still in the shot-up SUV.

      • notice the filming starts way down the road and by time it swings around to the scene, he’s already in the street with a gun next to him and some blood. I guess the helicopter was too busy swinging around to see the guys running up the street to film the actual shoot-out.

      • How would a witness know that he DIDN’T get in an argument? Maybe he got in an argument over there, or in the toilet, etc. Red flag when witnesses start telling you what DIDN’T happen. Surely, it’s hard enough to remember what did.

        • the only source for the argument story is the police chief. at least that’s what started it. hell, even Joe what’s his name said on Morning Joe that none of the witnesses he saw mentioned seeing the guy getting into an argument and storming out. Even he pointed out that the few that mentioned seeing him leave said he got up from his chair, put his coat on the back of it, and walked out the door.

          • Okay, but clarity demands that the witnesses stick to what they DID see and hear, and not stray into what they DIDN’T. It’s important, so that murder trials don’t start including 7 billion ‘witnesses’ saying they DIDN’T see the guy killing the deceased.

  12. CBS News witness describes 3 white, tall, athletically built men. http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/witness-describes-the-san-bernardino-shooting//

    • isn’t that the same description of the guys in the car during the Paris attacks?

      • Certainly the guys that shot up the cafes.

      • It sure is. Those guys are jet setters.

        The woman eyewitness in dougrross’ clip above states twice quite definitely that it was three tall athletically built men all dressed the same, wearing military attire all-black with vests and long cargo pants with zippers and baggy pockets – she couldn’t see their faces because she says they were wearing “hats” but says their skin looked white.

        Here’s a photo of (supposedly) the woman suspect’s body laid out on the ground right next to the destroyed SUV (evidently after they removed her body from the car) but she appears to be wearing shorts, not long cargo pants. I’m comparing her to the two cops in the photo and I’m thinking she looks a fair amount shorter than them. She does have a long sleeve black shirt on as the eyewitness and I suppose she had time to change…into a woman…(??)…she may not be one of the three shooters – maybe she was the getaway driver at the original incident or something?

  13. Colombo: “You know, one thing is still puzzling me. Who holds a Christmas party on December 2nd?”

    • The whole story needed to be wrapped up before Chanukah that’s why. Now, don’t call me names, just wait and see what happens. I’m
      betting no more shooting hoaxes between now and December 15th.

    • who holds a Christmas party on Dec. 2 on a Weds. at 11am in the morning? that’s a very good question.

      • It’s an Islamic thang, you wouldn’t understand.

        Seriously, it casts doubt on the veracity of the “party” itself, and everything about it. No real party, no real shooting.

        And did the suspects go to the party after they told the mother that they were going to a doctor’s appointment (because one or both had stomach flu) and then leave and go home, then return to shoot the place up? Or did they go to the party, leave and go home, and then tell the mother they were going to the doctor? Did they take the baby to the party? Nobody seems to have mentioned seeing a baby there.

        How many times did they leave the baby with the mother that morning?

  14. I don’t believe in the “Gun law agenda”. It’s partly because I’ve grown to believe the opposite of whatever I hear all the time in the media. I think the real agenda involves getting the most heavy weapons into the most hands. Why? What purpose would that serve?

    Whenever the ‘Illuminati’® want to bring a foreign population under control, or back under control, they foment, fund, supply and otherwise facilitate a nice, long, destructive civil war. Once the civil war gets going, they just sit back and wait for the people to get tired of killing each other. Then, they step back in and provide the people with what they’ve obviously been thirsting for in the trenches: a quiet home in the Scissorhands suburbs and everything that that mental castration entails.

    Ordo Ab Chao – The Freemason’s Motto.

    First comes the chaos, however.

    If and when they come for your gun (substitute your preferred inalienable right), it won’t be to actually take it, but to force you to pick a militia.

    Nobody actually in a civil war can win one. Forget the guns and move close to a border. Slip over and wait it out somewhere nice.

  15. This is why the government doesn’t need to take your guns away. All it has to do is frame you, kill you, then say whatever it wants about you, via it’s despicable propaganda wing.

    “Female San Bernardino Shooter Pledged Support to ISIS, Sources Say” – http://abcnews.go.com/US/female-san-bernardino-shooter-pledged-support-isis-sources/story?id=35579983

    Sources? Where is that social media post? What do the others by the same person say? “This is us at Denny’s, lol!!!” followed by “I pledge allegiance to ISIS”? Why did she post it anonymously? Why did she post it at all if remaining anonymous? What would be the point?

    “Tashfeen Malik and her husband Syed Farook were identified by police as the two shooters in the San Bernardino attack that left 14 people dead and 21 others injured on Wednesday.”

    Identified by police? How?

    What chance do you have? Why is it that a live person is innocent until proven guilty and must be referred to as the “alleged” whatever, but a dead person, killed by the authorities, loses all such rights and may be maligned by the media as “this murderous couple”, etc?

    The above linked article says “The FBI does not have evidence yet that ISIS directed or financed this plot. So far this massacre can be categorized as at least in part inspired by ISIS, though workplace issues may have been involved as well.”

    Ta-da! How easy was that? FBI sources say it, I believe it, that settles it.

    Meanwhile, News For Yahoos can’t manage to come up with one shred of evidence that the couple was even involved, or likely to have been involved, let alone “ISIS”-inspired. – https://gma.yahoo.com/first-photo-female-san-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik-231155377–abc-news-topstories.html

    In lieu of that, it decided to print Yahoo fodder like…

    —As the FBI continues to investigate, Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst, told ABC News she would not be surprised if Malik had been ISIS-inspired. “Terrorism is not gender-specific,” she said.—

    The former CIA analyst wouldn’t be surprised if Malik had been “ISIS”-inspired, because… drumroll… women CAN be “ISIS”-inspired too. Here’s the syllogism:

    Malik was a woman
    Terrorism isn’t gender-specific
    Ergo…
    Malik was probably a terrorist

    Absolutely disgusting. Anyone who can accept that crap and still believe that they believe in justice is delusional. And that’s a massive percentage of the people you interact with daily. Numbskulls that just accept whatever comes down the pike. That would accept that YOU were a terrorist, really, actually, albeit a very scrupulously careful and private one.

    Each of us has to be acutely aware of one fact of life now. We may be killed by the authorities and called whatever they want to call us, with our deaths being justified by any amount of ludicrous made-up crap that in no way fits with what people who knew us say we were and did, and nobody can force access to the purported evidence… for national security reasons. And you’re worried about your guns being taken away?

    It’s 1984. Look the part or die.

  16. Anyone interested in how this kind of post-mortem conviction (nobody’s being accused any more) can be used by the PTB to distract the masses, have a look at the UK’s Jimmy Savile case. As far as I can see, there isn’t one piece of hard evidence against this man (he’s supposed to have been an almost lifelong serial necrophiliac, pedophiliac, disabled-hospital-patient abuser, and not a Bob Hope-esque national treasure, celebrity, friend of the forces, prolific charity fund raiser and knight of the realm as previously thought) that would stand up in a court. All there is is a PURPORTED 400 individual, uncorroboratable “witnesses” who say they suffered abuse at his hands. These, of course, can’t be asked to provide public testimony under oath in a court (because there’s no case to answer), and can’t be named for privacy reasons.

    Seems that when you’re dead, the authorities/media can say anything. And whatever they say with a stern look on the news, idiots will lap up.

    I think it’s good to remind ourselves of what a famous liar said about The Big Lie.

    “All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

    • There must be at least 911 reasons that most people could be convinced that this is not true, if not more.

    • You have posted some real funny stuff here, Eggman. Promoting a civil war? Pretending Jimmy Savile might have been innocent? Saying there was no hard evidence against this creep? There was no hard evidence because, being above the law, he was never brought to trial!
      Ask any British actor about Savile- they’ll tell you how he ran wild for years, and everyone who dared complain was threatened by the cops or actually shoveled under.
      As for the Hitler quote, you have, with the usual dishonesty, failed to mention whom he was writing about- Jimmy Savile and his relatives.

      • I’m not promoting a civil war, as anyone who can read can see. I’m saying that I believe the powers-that-be are fomenting one, in order to benefit from the chilled aftermath. Really, do you have trouble with comprehension?

        I wrote: “Nobody actually in a civil war can win one. Forget the guns and move close to a border. Slip over and wait it out somewhere nice.”

        YOU have seen ZERO hard evidence that Jimmy Savile every harmed anyone in any way. YET you believe he did, simply because you read about PURPORTED accusations in the media. You’re as bad as the people who believe these two Muslim patsies harmed anyone.

        Have YOU, personally asked any British actor about Savile? I suspect you haven’t, yet you can tell me what they WOULD say? Who prompted you to form such ideas? Every man in the 60s, 70s and early 80s “ran wild” by today’s perverted ‘standards’.

        Who has provided any witness testimony, under oath, under pain of the penalty for perjury, in a court of law? NOBODY. That’s why we don’t ‘convict’ dead people. They have no access to a fair trial or the opportunity to face their accusers. These rights underpin our justice systems.

        Hitler was writing about the Jews (which I chose not to repeat here). I find that immaterial. The Jews may or may not be liars (though, since human beings generally are, I don’t see why they’d be different), but what he says about big lies is true.

        “With the usual dishonesty”? Are you nuts?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: