Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Fucking right-wing assholes.

---

Choose and perish.



And there you have it.

---

Quote:

---

That's not politics, I'm just sayin'. The vast majority of them die by guns.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Fucking right-wing assholes.

---

Choose and perish.



And there you have it.

---

Unsurprising to see our resident piece of shit siding with murder. Fuck you, Rappy.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Fucking right-wing assholes.

---

Choose and perish.



And there you have it.

---

Unsurprising to see our resident piece of shit siding with murder. Fuck you, Rappy.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

---

I don't see that in his post at all. If he wrote choose or perish, maybe. But, you'll see what you want...afterall you are an asshole.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Fucking right-wing assholes.

---

Choose and perish.



And there you have it.

---

Unsurprising to see our resident piece of shit siding with murder. Fuck you, Rappy.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

---

I don't see that in his post at all. If he wrote choose or perish, maybe. But, you'll see what you want...afterall you are an asshole.

---

Said by the person who just admitted earlier in the thread that they had never posted anything intelligent or worthwhile.

What makes you think anyone gives a shit what you have to say?



"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

---

Quote:

---

Liberal fount AlterNet pointed to Loughner’s disjointed rants about currency in order to make the case he is a dangerous gold and silver “radical.” Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center argued that the idea of constitutional money was responsible for “so much violence in the 1990s. It’s linked to the core Patriot theory that the Federal Reserve is actually a private corporation run for the benefit of unnamed international bankers.”
http://www.alternet.org/story/149466/is_jared_loughner_a_right-wing_ex
tremist

"Plaintiff, who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, David W. Williams, J., dismissed holding that federal reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations."
-United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 80-5905, Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html

"The banks have shown that they can't be trusted with the American economy. That's generally been the case, but now it's out in the open, $350-billion later [sic $27-trillion]. In 1913 the money power fo the country was taken away from the People, by Constitutional privilege it belongs to the Congress, but it was given up in the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve is no more 'federal' than Federal Express! Yet it has the power to determine the direction and use of money in our economy. If we could take that power back, and put Federal Reserve under Treasury, we start to be in a position of being able to control monetary policy on behalf of the United States people. We also have to address the issue of the fractional reserve system, which is how banks create money out of thin air. As they do that they've created the conditions where we have a Ponzi scheme collapsing of banks and the hedge funds together. We have to end the fractional reserve system."
-Congressman Dennis Kucinich
youtube.com/watch?v=1pVV4n2lKHk
http://www.infowars.com/bombshell-arizona-killer-very-liberal/

"There is no authority for a central bank. Ben Bernanke is the greatest counterfeiter the world has ever seen! Adolf Hitler was Time's Man of the Year too."
-Congressman Ron Paul MD, chairman of the House Banking Subcommittee seeking audit and elimination of the private "Federal" Reserve Bank Corporation
youtube.com/watch?v=gRZ-B14PEsc

"Not one dime of income taxes goes to support any federal program."
-President Ronald Reagan, right before George Bushes' CIA cousin John Hinkley Jr shot him (released from loonybin by George Bush Jr and Hussein Obama Soetoro)
youtube.com/watch?v=9nbMqQo4AYY

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

I realy have only one thing to say. Jong is absolutely right, in my opinion, that

Quote:

---

those that justify and even advocate murder are without human redemption.

---

and the things I read here are a prime example of that.

---

Quote:

---

Personally, I would delete Sig's remark, because "fuking right-wing assholes" is merely typical for here and happens every day, from one side or the other

---

Quote:

---

That anyone can write what Kane and Gino wrote is unconscionable and an expression of a sick mentality.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:

Quote:

---

That's not politics, I'm just sayin'. The vast majority of them die by guns.

---

Not calling you a liar, but I'd kind of like some evidence on that statement. Sometimes these phrases like "more people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason" seem true, but actually aren't, not by a long shot. I'll admit the gun statement sounds plausible though. Violence with guns is probably more likely to result in death than violence sans guns.

I agree with Frem on this issue. A gun is a tool, just like a knife, or even big muscles and martial arts. A gun is a dangerous equalizer, and something I will probably never own, but I have a hard time believing we'd all be safer if they took them away. We'd probably just see more people getting stabbed, or harmed/killed by other means.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"Brave people, one a citizen with a pistol, brought him down."

The person who acted FIRST and who ACTUALLY in REALITY stopped the shooting was an unarmed, older, democratic, woman. Try to get it straight this time, ok? I know it conflicts with your fantasy world of some dude with a (heee heee) 'big gun' being the hero of the day, but try to wrap your head around at least a little piece of actuality.

MEANWHILE, the guy with the gun was trying to figure out if he could get a good shot - considerations which cost him time - and in the end he decided he couldn't. Not only was the gun superfluous, it was an obstacle to action - no matter how much you try and spin it, little boy.

And BTW - the shooter is the exact reason for gun control, along with criminals and the underage. He's IS the epitome of the phrase 'nut with a gun.' But of course you are running screaming from something so reasonable as crazy people should not have guns, b/c this guy could just as well be - you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by peacekeeper:
When it comes to guns, it has to Chris Rock that has said THE most sensible thing. Let everybody have a gun, but make the bullets $5000 dollars each. Now THAT is a fucking BRILLIANT idea.

Peacekeeper---keeping order in every verse!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by mincingbeast:
After Nidal Hassan shot up Ft. Hood the discourse was:

Mouthbreathing Conservative: We must blame the political and religious rhetoric of all Muslims everywhere for the shooting!

Femmy Liberal: How unfair to make blanket assertions about people!

In the wake of the Gifford shooting, the discourse is:

Femmy Liberal: We should blame the political and religious rhetoric of the Tea Party, and all right wingers everyhwere, for the shooting!

Mouthbreathing Conservative: How unfair to make blanket assertions about people!

Those who cry foul now, and didn't cry foul before, are opportunistic and dishonest. I admire them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
I LOVE it!




Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

---

Quote:

---

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

...Folk *knew* this guy was having issues, and instead of trying to help, turned their backs and further marginalized him, not that this excuses him whatever, his actions are his own - but we have a society that makes people crazy and then punishes them for being so, and for THAT, we are, all of us, responsible...

---

Quote:

---

The Unabomber a Harvard MKULTRA Victim

In his first week, at the tender age of 16, the real Manchurian Candidate met with his soon to be controller, Dr Henry A Murray.

Ted would become one of many children indoctrinated, set-up and tormented by the "secret" CIA Mind Control program. Dr. Murray helped found the Boston Psychoanalytic Society, led the Harvard Psychological Clinic, selected agents for the Office of Strategic Services during World War II.

Dr. Murray would become world famous in 1967 as the CIA psychologist who slipped a colleague LSD. The colleague then took the magical mystery tour out the window of a New York Hotel, landing in front of horrified guests head-first on the sidewalk 14 floors below. It was the first, and worst, public exposure of the 7 billion dollar budgeted MKUltra Mind Control program in which Dr Murray worked.

But in 1959 Murray sat in an office at Harvard University in the early fall interviewing a promising prospect. From the Midwest, socially awkward, sexually repressed, incredibly brilliant...a mathematics prodigy. Murray must have liked the first test results on the very young prospect because he code named the 16 year old "Lawful". In Mind Control parlance the rough equivalent of "Perfect". Murray would meet with Ted regularly for the next three years until the records purge of MKultra in 1962 when the agency attempted to destroy all references and records related to the program.

David Kaczynski reveals the MK-ULTRA-CIA mind control program that brother Theodore Kaczynski (dubbed the Unabomber by the FBI) was unwittingly a part of for three years at Harvard, and then at the University of Michigan and probably U.C. Stanford. In recalling some of the details of his brother’s involvement in the covert behavior modification program, David Kaczynski says of his older brother, “In a sense, he wasn’t paranoid; he was in a sense conspired against.”

Here was a chance to ask David Kaczynski about his brilliant, eccentric, loving older brother, and what the U.S. government may have done to him and with him.

You know, Mom had remembered it because since Ted was only 17* when he went into this research project, parental consent was needed, and Mom remembered getting a form, you know, Harvard College, asking for her permission for Ted to be in this study and Mom said, ‘Gee, I thought Ted’s…. You know, he’s socially awkward, he doesn’t fit in very well. Maybe being exposed to psychologists could be very helpful to him. Well, little did she know that this study wasn’t conducted with his benefit in mind.

How knowledgeable was Ted’s defense team about MKULTRA?

David Kaczynski: The defense apparently put a lot of research into this. It was going to be at least one of their arguments for mitigation that Ted had been seriously abused in this…. this research program that might have even been funded by the federal government. It was hard to get research, hard to make the connection fully. They [Ted Kaczynski’s legal team] found that numbers of the records had actually been destroyed – not for confidentiality reasons, or something. It was destroyed because there was a congressional investigation of the MKULTRA program and the then director really, uh, in contempt of Congress, destroyed many of the records of that program. They did eventually get to look at some of Murray’s private research papers. That was where some of these transcripts were found. They also were able to track down just a couple of other participants in the study, one of which was, by the way, working at Las Alamos making big bombs. A weird irony of the whole thing.

Mind Control in the Unabomber Manifesto:

Quote:

---

151. The social disruption that we see today is certainly not the result of mere chance. It can only be a result fo the conditions of life that the system imposes on people. (We have argued that the most important of these conditions is disruption of the power process.) If the systems succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure itw own survival, a new watershed in human history will have passed. Whereas formerly the limits of human endurance have imposed limits on the development of societies (as we explained in
paragraphs 143, 144), industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human being will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system.

[27] 152. Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom. [28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the human mind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering. In many cases, there will be humanitarian justification. For example, when a psychiatrist prescribes an anti-depressant for a depressed patient, he is clearly doing that individual a favor. It would be inhumane to withhold the drug from someone who needs it. When parents send their children to Sylvan Learning Centers to have them manipulated into becoming enthusiastic about their studies, they do so from concern for their children's welfare. It may be that some of these parents wish that one didn't have to have specialized training to get a job and that their kid didn't have to be brainwashed into becoming a computer nerd. But what can they do? They can't change society, and their child may be unemployable if he doesn't have certain skills. So they send him to Sylvan.

153. Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however). The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it (see paragraph 127). Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred. [14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system.

154. Suppose a biological trait is discovered that increases the likelihood that a child will grow up to be a criminal and suppose some sort of gene therapy can remove this trait. [29] Of course most parents whose children possess the trait will have them undergo the therapy. It would be inhumane to do otherwise, since the child would probably have a miserable life if he grew up to be a criminal. But many or most primitive societies have a low crime rate in comparison with that of our society, even though they have neither high-tech methods of child-rearing nor harsh systems of punishment. Since there is no reason to suppose that more modern men than primitive men have innate predatory tendencies, the high crime rate of our society must be due to the pressures that modern conditions put on people, to which many cannot or will not adjust. Thus a treatment designed to remove potential criminal tendencies is at least in part a way of re-engineering people so that they suit the requirements of the system.

155. Our society tends to regard as a "sickness" any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a "cure" for a "sickness" and therefore as good.

156. In paragraph 127 we pointed out that if the use of a new item of technology is INITIALLY optional, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional, because the new technology tends to change society in such a way that it becomes difficult or impossible for an individual to function without using that technology. This applies also to the technology of human behavior. In a world in which most children are put through a program to make them enthusiastic about studying, a parent will almost be forced to put his kid through such a program, because if he does not, then the kid will grow up to be, comparatively speaking, an ignoramus and therefore unemployable. Or suppose a biological treatment is discovered that, without undesirable side-effects, will greatly reduce the psychological stress from which so many people suffer in our society. If large numbers of people choose to undergo the treatment, then the general level of stress in society will be reduced, so that it will be possible for the system to increase the stress-producing pressures. In fact, something like this seems to have happened already with one of our society's most important psychological tools for enabling people to reduce (or at least temporarily escape from) stress, namely, mass entertainment (see paragraph 147). Our use of mass entertainment is "optional": No law requires us to watch television, listen to the radio, read magazines. Yet mass entertainment is a means of escape and stress-reduction on which most of us have become dependent. Everyone complains about the trashiness of television, but almost everyone watches it. A few have kicked the TV habit, but it would be a rare person who could get along today without using ANY form of mass entertainment. (Yet until quite recently in human history most people got along very nicely with no other entertainment than that which each local community created for itself.) Without the entertainment industry the system probably would not have been able to get away with putting as much stress-producing pressure on us as it does.

157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.

158. It presumably would be impractical for all people to have electrodes inserted in their heads so that they could be controlled by the authorities. But the fact that human thoughts and feelings are so open to biological intervention shows that the problem of controlling human behavior is mainly a technical problem; a problem of neurons, hormones and complex molecules; the kind of problem that is accessible to scientific attack. Given the outstanding record of our society in solving technical problems, it is overwhelmingly probable that great advances will be made in the control of human behavior.

---

http://robertscourt.blogspot.com/2008/06/unabomber-harvard-mkultra-vic
tim.html

---

Quote:

---

"Not a single issue voter, but if I was, gay rights would be it. I just want Democrats to be tough. And I wish Obama were tougher. That’s all. I’m a proud gay. I had favorite books: The Communist Manifesto."
-Jared Lee Loughner (or his sockpuppet)
www.businessinsider.com/jared-lee-loughner-2011-1

“Good luck to you, Mr. Loughner."
-U.S. Magistrate Lawrence Anderson

"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
-Dictator Hussein Obama Soetoro
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/Obama_brings_a_gun_to_a_kn
ife_fight.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:



And BTW - the shooter is the exact reason for gun control, along with criminals and the underage. He's IS the epitome of the phrase 'nut with a gun.' But of course you are running screaming from something so reasonable as crazy people should not have guns, b/c this guy could just as well be - you.

---

Quote:

---

"God made all men, but Sam Colt made them equal." -- attributed to Colt advertising slogan.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,28831-2,00.html

---

Quote:

---

By the way, didn't you have someone ride around with a shotgun shooting up your paradise recently?

Hows that "knife crime" thing working out?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"Yes, Wulf, we know you want no control whatsoever on guns, ammo, bombs, etc. We know you live in an “all-or-nothing”, “black-and-white” world, so there’s no use trying to communicate with you. To you, any form of moderation is “control”, but you rail against any whiff of controlling yourself or others who believe as you do. We have no desire to “control” others, merely to utilize common sense. People with police records and those with well-known mental health problems should be allowed to have guns, in your world, probably because you think you’d take them out with YOUR guns. Doesn’t actually work that way, in real life."

Couple of things. Your way doesn't work either.

For example. Let say there is a guy who was caught dealing drugs (nothing big, just weed). He goes in, after having been convicted of 8 years. 2 years in, he realizes he won't make it thru the next 6 without catching more time. So he flips on those who provided for him to sell. He gets out for time served.

Now hes back on the street, with a conviction, no job experience, and 20 buck in his pocket.

But hes convinced to go the right way. He shacks up with his baby mama, and works with his parole officer to get a job. Its not much, and doesnt allow him to get anywhere, but its work.

he has to stay in his old neighborhood where originally was caught. The heavy heads know he flipped and are after him.

He COULD get a gun off the street, but wants to do it the "right and legal" way, do he goes to find a gun shop.

They tell him no because he was a convicted felon etc.

The next day, hes walking home and bang. Dead.


Its almost as easy to get a gun off the street in NY/LA, as it is in Georgia.

Gun Control simply does NOT work.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Arizona shooter Jared Lee Loughner has Jewish mother, acquaintance says

An acquaintance of Jared Lee Loughner, the accused gunman in the shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, says his mother is Jewish.

Bryce Tierney, a friend of Loughner from high school, told Mother Jones magazine that the alleged gunman posted “Mein Kampf” as a “favorite book” on a social media site in part to provoke his mother, who Tierney says is Jewish.

Amy Loughner’s maiden name is Totman, according to Arizona public records, and she married Randy Loughner in 1986. Totman is a common old English name and JTA could not uncover any record of Jewish affiliation for the family. Jewish Tucsonians said they were unaware of the family.

http://www.jewishjournal.com/arizona_shooting/article/alleged_arizona_
shooter_jared_lee_loughner_has_ jewish_mother_acquaintance_s/

---

Quote:

---

Is Loughner’s mother Jewish?

JTA Jewish News Service
January 10, 2011

There's a lot of buzz about the parents of Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter in the attack Saturday that critically wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and killed six people in an attack in Tucson.

More precisely, there's a lot of buzz about who these parents are -- we've heard about Loughner's allegedly untoward behavior at a community college, what high school acquaintances have said -- but the New York Times, for instance, shunts until the very end of its profile today what it knows about Randy and Amy Loughner: Randy Loughner was an unpleasant neighbor.

There's not much more, beyond their silence.

Now we get this from Mother Jones. Nick Baumann interviews Bryce Tierney, a friend of Jared's who recalls the alleged shooter's first encounter with Giffords, in 2007 -- and then explains why Jared might have listed Mein Kampf as a "favorite book":

Tierney believes that Loughner was very interested in pushing people's buttons—and that may have been why he listed Hitler's Mein Kampf as one of his favorite books on his YouTube page. (Loughner's mom is Jewish, according to Tierney.)

UPDATE: Amy Joanne Totman and Randy Loughner were married on April 24, 1986 in Pima County -- or perhaps that's the day they got their license, Arizona state records show. No judge is listed -- perhaps suggesting they were married by clergy? I'm not so well versed in these matters.

In any case, Totman is an old English name, and seems fairly common. I'm not seeing any connection, except for what Tierney thinks he remembers -- and even if he remembers correctly, his informant was likely Jared, who may be less than reliable.

http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2011/01/10/2742483/is-loughners-
mother-jewish

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/us/10shooter.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1&
hp

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voic
email-phone-message?page=1

---

Quote:

---

MASS MURDERERS PREFER WALMART, THE WORLD'S LARGEST GUN DEALER

Here is a scenario you might find entertaining. He didn't have a job, and lived with his parents, but he bought a $500 gun on November 30, 2010. On the day he decides to go on a shooting rampage, he purchases bullets from Walmart. Why didn't he already have bullets?

Consider the possibility that the Jews were using him as another Lee Oswald, but he figured it out, and he decided to get some real bullets, and then he turned on those Jews, thereby explaining his mugshot smirk.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/arizona-shooting/tucson-shoo
ter-was-able-to-buy-gun-with-ease/article1864871/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703779704576074080255720
732.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

---

Quote:

---

WWW.THEPOWERHOUR.COM RADIO MONDAY – JANUARY 10 – DOUBLE FEATURE:

Hour 1 http://archives2011.gcnlive.com/Archives2011/jan11/PowerHour/0110111.m
p3

Federal judge appoints lawyer for shooter Jared Laughner, same lawyer for SSgt Tim "I Have A Microchip In My Ass" McVeigh the MKULTRA mind control patsy in the Fed Govt's bombing of the OKC Fed building killing little children, same lawyer for Unabomber Ted Kaczynski the admitted MKULTRA mind control lab rat, lawyer for CIA MKULTRA Al Qaeda patsy Zacarias Moussaoui.

Ex cop George Freund joins TPH during the 1st hour to give his thoughts on the latest shootings in Arizona. Listen to George every Thursday at 8:00pm live on www.ThatChannel.com : The truly beautiful people get their news from alternative sources. Put something wild into your evening news with Conspiracy Cafe.

Listen to host George Freund's Podcast: http://thatradio.podhoster.com/index.php?sid=1746

Hour 2 http://archives2011.gcnlive.com/Archives2011/jan11/PowerHour/0110112.m
p3

ATTORNEY KURT HASKELL provides an update since originally reporting on his eye-witness account of the now infamous ‘Underwear Bomber’ incident, where governmental agencies ordered the airline to allow the bomber on the airliner, without a passport and bypassing the naked body scanner. The US State Dept later admitted it was ordered by an unnamed US Govt agency to put the bomber on the plane.

“Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans.”

Let me explain: [The truth being more than one person was involved and the authorities refusing to answer the key question as to why particular individuals are not screened by Customs agents - - - and in this case, why the actual Underwear Bomber went suspiciously unscreened!]
Website: http://www.HaskellLawFirm.com
Latest Story--By Kurt Haskell; January 1, 2011: The Man In Orange and the Merry Go Round of Ron Smith/U.S. Customs
Radio: http://www.blogtalkradio.com

---

Quote:

---

JEW LOUGHNER AND JEW GIFFORDS WERE MEMBERS OF THE SAME SYNOGUE

This is an amazing story. We now learn that Jared Lee Loughner's mother Amy Loughner is a member of the SAME Reform synagogue as Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords! That means that Amy's son, who lives with his Jewish parents, Amy and Randy Loughner, is ALSO a member of the same synagogue as his shooting victim, Rep. Giffords.

Why didn't we hear about this from our super-sleuth national media?

Instead, we hear that a 'WHITE MAN' is the shooter. We hear that 'ANTI-SEMITISM' is his motive. (Mass Mind Control anyone?)

But now...now...some FACTS are leaking out!

His best friend, Bryce Tierney, who got a "farewell" voice message the night before the shootings tells us that his friend is Jewish. He tells us that Jared Loughner put Mein Kampf down as "favorite reading" to irritate his Jewish mother, Amy.

The story and the coverup of the story gets wilder. The Loughners and the Giffords were members of the same Congregation Chaverim. On the Congregation Chaverim website we learn that this Reform synagogue that was founded in 1973 has 140 families. That's a very small group. The Rabbi, Stephanie Aaron surely knows every single family member of her congregation on a first name basis!

That includes 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner.

So, it is IMPOSSIBLE that Rabbi Stephanie Aaron did not KNOW instantly upon learning that a Jared Lee Loughner had shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords that BOTH people were members of her small congregation!

But does Rabbi Aaron make ANY effort to inform the media, as she takes hundreds and hundreds of media calls from the mass media, of this fact?

Apparently not!

www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/us-news-white-folks/13368-
loughner-jewish-but-his-synagogue-congregation-chaverim-hid-fact-america.html

"Each of us brings a Gabby moment to mind; Gabrielle serving our country with chain, G-d’s grace, and eloquence. In the Hebrew Bible, shlomo Ha Molech, King Solomon, asks G-d for the gift of a lev chacham v’navon, a wise and an understanding heart. Gabrielle’s Hebrew name is Gavriella bat Gloria v’Spencer, and we also use Gavriella bat Sarah."
-Rabbi Stephanie Aaron, Chaverim Synogue, Tuscon AZ
http://www.chaverim.net

---

Quote:

---

Government Mind Control Experiments on U.S. Soldiers: Shocking Claims Come to Light in New Court Case

Mother Jones

Their stories are a staple of conspiracy culture: broken men, suffering hallucinations and near-total amnesia, who say they are victims of secret government mind-control experiments. Think Liev Schreiber in The Manchurian Candidate or Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory. Journalists are a favorite target for the paranoid delusions of this population. So is Gordon Erspamer—and the San Francisco lawyer's latest case isn't helping him to fend off the tinfoil-hat crowd.

He has filed suit against the CIA and the US Army on behalf of the Vietnam Veterans of America and six former American soldiers who claim they are the real thing: survivors of classified government tests conducted at the Army's Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland between 1950 and 1975. "I get a lot of calls," he says. "There are a lot of crazy people out there who think that somebody from Mars is controlling their behavior via radio waves." But when it comes to Edgewood, "I'm finding that more and more of those stories are true!"

That government scientists conducted human experiments at Edgewood is not in question. "The program involved testing of nerve agents, nerve agent antidotes, psychochemicals, and irritants," according to a 1994 General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office) report (PDF). At least 7,800 US servicemen served "as laboratory rats or guinea pigs" at Edgewood, alleges Erspamer's complaint, filed in January in a federal district court in California.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has reported that military scientists tested hundreds of chemical and biological substances on them, including VX, tabun, soman, sarin, cyanide, LSD, PCP, and World War I-era blister agents like phosgene and mustard. The full scope of the tests, however, may never be known. As a CIA official explained to the GAO, referring to the agency's infamous MKULTRA mind-control experiments, "The names of those involved in the tests are not available because names were not recorded or the records were subsequently destroyed." Besides, said the official, some of the tests involving LSD and other psychochemical drugs "were administered to an undetermined number of people without their knowledge."

Erspamer's plaintiffs claim that, although they volunteered for the Edgewood program, they were never adequately informed of the potential risks and continue to suffer debilitating health effects as a result of the experiments. They hope to force the CIA and the Army to admit wrongdoing, inform them of the specific substances they were exposed to, and provide access to subsidized health care to treat their Edgewood-related ailments. Despite what they describe as decades of suffering resulting from their Edgewood experiences, the former soldiers are not seeking monetary damages; a 1950 Supreme Court decision, the Feres case, precludes military personnel from suing the federal government for personal injuries sustained in the line of duty.

The CIA's decision to use military personnel as test subjects followed the court's decision and is an issue Erspamer plans to raise at trial. "Suddenly, they stopped using civilian subjects and said, 'Oh, we can get these military guys for free,'" he says. "The government could do whatever it wanted to them without liability. We want to bring that to the attention of the public, because I don't think most people understand that." (Asked about Erspamer's suit, CIA spokeswoman Marie Harf would say only that the agency's human testing program has "been thoroughly investigated, and the CIA fully cooperated with each of the investigations.")

Erspamer's involvement in the case is deeply personal. His father was a government scientist during Operation Crossroads, a series of nuclear tests conducted at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific in the summer of 1946; he was present aboard a research vessel for the "Baker" test, during which a 21-kiloton thermonuclear bomb was detonated 90 feet below water. The blast resulted in massive radioactive contamination. Erspamer's father and the rest of the ship's crew, he says, all died in middle age from radiogenic diseases.

Erspamer makes his living in the field of energy litigation, but has twice before argued class action suits for veterans—one for soldiers who, like his father, were exposed to radiation during nuclear tests (a case he ultimately lost in a 1992 appellate decision) and more recently one on behalf of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans denied treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. The case is on appeal in California's 9th Circuit. "Nobody out there is doing these types of cases," he says. "It's really sad because the veterans are left holding the bag, and it's not a very pretty bag."

One of those vets is Frank Rochelle. Unlike those of other test veterans, portions of his heavily redacted medical records have survived, providing a rare, if incomplete, account of his experiences. In 1968, while posted at Virginia's Fort Lee as a 20-year-old Army draftee, he saw a notice calling for volunteers for the Edgewood program. Among the promised incentives were relief from guard duty, the freedom to wear civilian clothes, three-day weekends, and, upon completion, a medal of commendation—all for participation in experiments that, according to the notice, would help the military test a new generation of equipment, clothing, and gas masks.

Upon his arrival at the testing facility in Maryland, he says he was asked to sign a series of documents, including a release form and a secrecy agreement. The tests would be risk free, he says he was told, and any drugs given would not exceed normal dosage. Over the next two months, however, he was subjected to three rounds of experiments that, Rochelle says, left him permanently damaged. His medical records indicate that he was exposed to nonlethal incapacitating agents like DHMP and glycolate, both of which act as sedatives that produce hallucinations. In the latter case, Rochelle says he was taken into a gas chamber and strapped to a chair by two men in white lab coats, who affixed a mask to his face and told him to breathe normally.

He quickly lost consciousness. According to Erspamer's complaint, "Over the next two to three days, Frank was hallucinating and high: he thought he was three feet tall, saw animals on the walls, thought he was being pursued by a 6-foot-tall white rabbit, heard people calling his name, thought that all his freckles were bugs under his skin, and used a razor to try to cut these bugs out. No one from the clinical staff intervened on his behalf…"

Medical records indicate that Rochelle went through a third round of testing, but he has no memory of it. For years he's been having nightmares about the Edgewood tests and now suffers from anxiety, memory loss, sleep apnea, tinnitus, and loss of vision, all of which he claims are direct results of the experiments. Still, he didn't inform his doctor of the tests until 2006, believing that he was still bound by the oath of secrecy he swore in 1968. (The government finally released human test subjects to speak to their physicians about the tests in June 2006, under the condition that they not "discuss anything that relates to operational information that might reveal chemical or biological warfare vulnerabilities or capabilities.")

Rochelle's story is similar to those of Erspamer's other plaintiffs, all of whom claim to be suffering debilitating health effects stemming from the experiments. Of course, substantiating these claims is a challenge, given that most of the medical records were destroyed upon completion of the program. Rochelle's records remain intact, but for "others we have less information," says Erspamer. "We spent a great deal of time on that topic, and we are confident that the plaintiffs are who they say they are, were where they said they were, and got what they said they got," in terms of exposure to experimental chemicals. "Who bears the burden on that issue when the defendants destroyed the evidence?" Erspamer asks. "They've put all that stuff through the shredder."

Compensation for injuries sustained during human testing of chemical and biological agents is not unprecedented. Last year, more than 350 servicemen who served as test subjects at Porton Down, a secret military research facility where the British government conducted its own series of mind-control experiments, were granted nearly $6 million in compensation in an out-of-court settlement with the UK's Ministry of Defence.

Likewise, in 2004, the Canadian government began offering $18,000 payments to eligible veterans of experiments at its testing facilities.
Nevertheless, says Erspamer, "No American soldiers have ever been compensated." The CIA and the Army "just hope they're all gonna die off, and they will unless somebody does something."

http://www.alternet.org/story/140206/

---