by Scott Creighton
terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims
- Sheriff Fuller says motive doesn’t matter. Don’t need a motive in a murder case. Okay. There you have it.
- He changed cars during the murder spree. Sure he did. Why not?
- He waved his rights and confessed, says the guy who’s trying to prosecute the
patsysuspect with no supporting evidence. That makes it easier.
- Now we learn, he may have picked up more customers after the second wave of shootings.
- Obama takes the opportunity to condemn the “ideological rhetoric” surrounding the “issue” of the second amendment (while the chief champion of that “issue” is laid to rest)
Headlines across the country read “Suspect Admits Involvement in Shootings… Motive Unclear” as the story of the Saturday shooting spree in Kalamazoo gets sorted out by the MSM for public consumption.
Meanwhile, the father of the modern interpretation of the second amendment remains dead (but don’t question those circumstances or you will be branded with a scarlet “CS”)
As usual, the MSM only gets part of the story correct. There is no motive. That’s the only part that is right.
Yesterday, I wrote about the ridiculous story of how Jason B. Dalton was working two jobs, a normal quiet guy, raising two children and doing everything he thought he could to live the American Dream when suddenly for no reason, he went off and shot some random person, drove a shift for Uber and then went off on two more locations killing 6 people before retiring to his favorite bar for a couple hours to wind down after a night of mass murder. He was calmly arrested after leaving that bar, according to officials.
If you were inclined to have questions about the official story before, prepare to be amazed because it gets worse.
First of all, when the reporters tell you Jason B. Dalton “admitted” to “taking part” in the attacks and they show you an image of him sitting in court during his arraignment hearing, implying that he said that on the video as part of this statement, he didn’t do that. In fact, all he said in court was “I would prefer just to remain silent,”
The story about him “admitting” his “participation” in the shootings comes from the prosecutor and it’s not backed up with any evidence. That makes it tantamount to “activists say” journalism from Syria or Libya or something. Talk about tainting the jury-pool.
Jeffrey S. Getting, the prosecuting attorney for Kalamazoo County, said Monday that after his arrest, Mr. Dalton “made a statement to law enforcement admitting his involvement in each of the shootings.” New York Times
During a talk with investigators, Dalton waived his right against self-incrimination and confessed his role in the Saturday night shootings, Kalamazoo County Prosecutor Jeffrey S. Getting said. Dalton admitted “that he took people’s lives,” Kalamazoo police Det. Cory Ghiringhelli told the court. Reading Eagle
You might think while he confessed his sins to the police and prosecutor that he would let them in on the little secret that was his motive… seems to make sense right. He “waves his rights” and spills the beans… but says “Oh no. I wont tell you why I did it. That’s a secret”
Really? REALLY?! (alright. I have to keep from ranting again)
So he confesses to them that he did it but remains mum on the motive. But don’t worry about that because law enforcement in Kalamazoo doesn’t worry about little things like motives when 6 people are killed.
Questions about motive and Dalton’s frame of mind are “going to be the hardest to answer for anybody,” (Kalamazoo County Sheriff Richard C. Fuller III ) said. He expects some answers to emerge in court, but he doubts they will be satisfying.
“In the end, I ask people, because I keep hearing this question of why, ‘What would be the answer that would be an acceptable answer for you?’ They have to think about it for a moment, and they say, ‘Probably nothing.’
“I have to say, ‘You are probably correct.’ I can’t imagine what the answer would be that would let us go, ‘OK, we understand now.’ Because we are not going to understand,” the sheriff said. Reading Eagle
Think about the mental gymnastics and twisted logic in that statement from the county sheriff. It’s like it was an answer written for him by his publicist. Talk about putting the questioner on the spot: “What’s a good enough answer for YOU when 6 people lie dead in the morgue?”
Uh… the right one?
“Means, motive and opportunity”. Isn’t that like Crime Fighting 101 or something? Even a craaAAaaAaaazy person has a motive. That’s how you know they are crazy. By how whacked out their motive is. Even when the victims are random there is a motive. There is something happening in the back of their minds that makes them do what they do. We aren’t robots. Decisions are made which lead to actions and the reason for those decisions and hence the actions is called… motive.
The “acceptable answer” therefore is the one that the suspect considers logical, not the everyday person who asks the question “so what was his motive?”
But of course, that assumes there is a logic to the motive. Tim McVeigh supposedly had a motive. So did Oswald supposedly. So did bin Laden (he hated us for our freedom, remember?)
But not Dalton. The officials running the investigation have already declared a couple days after the event ‘ we are not going to understand,” and that is that… so shut up about it.
Meanwhile, it seems Dalton may not have been drinking those two hours after the last shootings as we originally thought he was. Turns out, he may have been back to work.
“As authorities pieced together Jason B. Dalton’s actions, the prosecutor said he picked up Uber fares after the first shooting and probably got more riders after the subsequent shootings” Reading Eagle
Let me ask you this: what is the motive for a guy committing all these shootings, knowing he will be caught, to go to work in the first place? Does he really expect to be free long enough to get paid? Does he want the money put on his commissary while in the joint? What’s that motive look like?
Now here’s an interesting part of the story. It would appear that Dalton used two different vehicles during the shooting spree.
Dalton, a 45-year-old Uber driver, opened fire at three locations on Saturday in a frenzy of violence that authorities said had no apparent pattern. Witnesses described the same shooter at each crime scene, but two different vehicles.
A witness to the first burst of gunfire saw Dalton driving a silver SUV, Kalamazoo County Sheriff’s Detective Sgt. William Sparrow testified during Dalton’s arraignment Monday…
More than four hours later, when the gunman killed a man and his teenage son at a Kalamazoo Kia dealership, roughly a mile from the Western Michigan University campus, surveillance video showed him driving a “dark-colored Chevrolet HHR,” according to Kalamazoo Public Safety Detective Cory Ghiringhelli.
A vehicle matching that description was seen at the Cracker Barrel restaurant less than 20 minutes later, where four women were shot to death and a 14-year-old girl was critically injured, authorities said. Huffington Post
He was also supposed to have a dog in the back of the silver SUV when he picked up a passenger early in his shift and that dog was supposedly seen by a witness at the first shooting. But the dog is never mentioned again. What happened to the silver SUV? What happened to the dog? Why take a smelly dog on an Uber shift?
Here is a picture from Daily Mail which supposedly shows his Uber page and the Chevy HHR.
Here is a picture of the silver SUV from Dallas News.
And here is a Daily Mail image with the silver SUV shot superimposed by the Daily Mail.
Multiple vehicles, no motive, good work ethic and a “confession” says the activists involved in the case. That’s the story of Ward Cleaver going all “Travis Bickle” for no reason this past Saturday in Kalamazoo. As the sheriff said, don’t try to understand it, just take their word for it or wear your scarlet letters.
“On Saturday another one of our communities was terrorized by gun violence. As many of you read, six people were gunned down in a rampage in Kalamazoo. Before I joined all of you, I called the mayor, the sheriff and the police chief and told them they would have whatever federal support they needed in their investigation. Their local officials and first responders did an outstanding job in apprehending very quickly. But you have families who are shattered today. Earlier this year I took some steps that will make it harder for dangerous people like this individual to buy a gun but clearly we are going to need to do more if we are going to keep innocent Americans safe. And I have to assume all of you are just as tired as I am of seeing this stuff happen in your states so that’s an area where we also need to partner and think of what we can do in a common sense way in a bi-partisan way without some of the ideological rhetoric that so often surrounds that issue” President Obama
Notice he calls the motiveless shooting sprees “terrorism” by admitting the communities are being “terrorized” then he jumps into his political aims: “common sense” changes to the second amendment as currently defined (by a guy who died last week with no autopsy) though a “bi-partisan” movement of people sick of seeing all these motiveless killing sprees.
Let’s take a second to reflect:
terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims
Naomi Klein wrote a book years ago defining what she called the Shock Doctrine. The work detailed the recent history of the neoliberal, Washington Consensus’ primary tool in bringing about “CHANGE” to other nations and that was the typical “problem, reaction, solution” model. The difference was, they caused the problems in anticipation of the crisis so they could offer a solution no one would ever accept without the manufactured crisis.
Today it is a staple of our foreign policy. We did it in Libya, Syria, Ukraine and several African nations in order to impose regime change on behalf of various business and financial interests.
The Shock Doctrine was employed here with the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the derivatives bubble which lead them to cripple the economy and in the wake of that manufactured crisis, remake the economy in a way favorable to a small elite group of financial institutions.
Obama used the pending end of unemployment insurance for millions of people a few years ago to create a crisis which allowed him to compromise and pass the first round of austerity measures, something that is critical to neoliberal, Washington Consensus economic ideology.
There is no question that this model, this “shock doctrine”, is a favorite tool of not only presidents and leaders of the past, but also of the current president.
And here we have him taking the opportunity with the dead still above ground, to strike while the iron is hot, calling for “common sense” gun laws.
This he does as they lay Scalia to rest.
I wonder what his litmus test will be for his next Supreme Court nominee will be.
I know it is painful to put the pieces together sometimes. It is downright distasteful. I get that.
But you need to. You need to understand there is ALWAYS a motive. As crazy, as dark, as twisted as it may be, there is ALWAYS a motive. And when a guy who just spoke to President Obama tells you you don’t need to worry about a motive, you should really consider worrying about that motive. Because it is there.
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)