Quote of the day—Red Nation Rising @RedNationRising

The democrats will stop at nothing to push their agendas. I’d love to know how many acts of violence have been orchestrated by them to push gun control. I suspect the results would match our suspicions.

ConspiracyTheory

Red Nation Rising @RedNationRising
Tweeted on September 8, 2019
[Back in the late 1990s this was a common suspicion. I never heard anyone say they thought the shooter themselves planned it as a means to pass gun control bills. They mostly suspected it was some sort of mind control or “programming” of mentally unstable people. I thought it extremely unlikely.

The probabilities increased dramatically with the Las Vegas shooting. A rich, old, white guy was a different demographic than we had ever seen before. There was picture of the murderer at a Hillary rally wearing a vagina hat but there was little else to gives us clues as to his political persuasion or possible motivation. The expense, planning, and horrendous number of victims indicated something well beyond what other murderers had demonstrated.

Then there was another mass murder, I forget which one, with a manifesto explicitly advocating more gun control. There are no more probabilities. There is only certainty that it has happened. The questions are now, “How many times has it happened?” and “How many more times will it happen before we can put an end to, or dramatically reduce, their incredibly evil activities?”—Joe]

12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Red Nation Rising @RedNationRising

  1. I think the “push gun control” murder event you’re referring to was the mosque shooting in New Zealand.
    Matthew Bracken has written a number of novels and short stories (“Enemies” trilogy, “Raoul X”) exploring this concept. I assume others have as well but his work is what I know well, and he does a good (and quite scary) version.

    • The New Zealand government is intimidating and threatening people against the dissemination of the shooter’s manifesto.

      • Sure. But as Americans, why would we care? I think they tried to shut down one guy who runs a company that has “kiwi” in its name, apparently suffering from the delusion he was based in NZ. Since he’s actually in Florida, he sent back (and published) a nicely blunt message telling them to f*** off.

  2. The 1977 movie Telefon with Charles Bronson is about this very concept.

    Much later it’s depicted in the Firefly TV series, as fugitive, River Tam is “activated” via the broadcast media, so as to make a ruckus and thus make her location known to the authorities.

    If the idea of having hypnotized “plants”, or “cells of one”, which could be activated to a pre-programmed response via some trigger-word, phrase, or image, etc., was around long enough by 1977 to make a movie about it, you know it was around for some time before that. No doubt it’s been thought of by the power hungry since the advent of hypnotism, or “Mesmerization”;
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_hypnosis

    See also the Jesuit-trained, Franz Mesmer;
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Mesmer

    And speaking of Jesuits; interestingly, we’ve now been programmed to believe that a “conspiracy” is “something that is not happening, but is purely the result of someone’s over-active imagination”. So when we begin to see conspiracies in the world, we are forced to disbelieve our own eyes and ears.

    I can’t recall having heard the word “conspiracy” come out of anyone’s mouth in the last several years when it wasn’t intended to mean “the imaginings of a crazy person”. At best it’s now used to mean “conspiracy theory“, but now we simply drop off the word “theory” for the sake of expedience, with the universal understanding that the word “theory” being attached to it is implied and that it means “something not real, but totally made up”.

    The correct definition of “conspiracy”, being “two or more people cooperating in some nefarious activity” is all but lost, due, quite possibly, to a conspiracy.

    Someone once said that the greatest of satan’s accomplishments was to convince much of the world that he doesn’t exist. Similarly, conspiracies now, by the definition of common usage, no longer exist.

    Michael Medved for example, on his radio show, has a recurring segment he calls “Conspiracy Day” or some such. It’s not about conspiracies at all, whatsoever, but about “conspiracy theories“, i.e. the notions of stupid and/or crazy people, or “those things which by definition are not actually happening”.

    Does this mean that if you work together with someone in a nefarious activity you’re now invisible to regular consumers of popular culture? Or rather; maybe people could look right at you, see you and hear you, etc., but refuse to believe their senses on the grounds that conspiracies are only perceived by crazy people. We should ask Michael Medved. I wonder what he would say.

  3. I’m sure there have been people that have decided that now is a good time to do evil things because of an election or legislative timing.

    it seems that there is always a rash of highly visible mass shootings just as the election/campaigning starts to get heavy. In 2017 it was Parkland.

    Are there people willing to do a false flag? I believe so, but did they? Are they actually willing to kill people just to advance the gun control ideas? I really hope not.

    And the thing is, that no matter what evil is done, by which group of people, for whatever reason, the only thing that we hear is what our media wants us to hear. We hear about the political leanings of the guy in Texas, the guy in Ohio isn’t important once we know he was left leaning.

    • “Are they actually willing to kill people just to advance the gun control ideas? I really hope not.”
      I would also hope not, but we know of at least one case where someone did commit murder with that intent (at least in part).

    • “Are they really willing to kill people just to advance the gun control ideas?”

      Given that collectivist regimes have demonstrated a willingness (or even a fervent desire) to kill tens of millions of people in pursuit of their imagined Utopiae, it is entirely plausible that those who seek to impose such a regime on the United States would be willing to slaughter citizens by the hundreds in order to bring about the disarmament of free citizens that would enable them to impose a totalitarian regime.

  4. “Consipracy” is an easy word to say but very difficult to prove. That said, there are different kinds of conspiracies, some easier than others.

    The Left has engaged in “ratcheting” as a standard practice; argue, campaign, plead, to get a small advantage, then leverage that concession to get another concession. Then another, etc. It never stops, there’s always another ratchet step.

    Take Nikolas Kruz, the Florida high school mass murderer; might there have been a “Raoul X” involved? Possible, but improbable, because one wasn’t needed. The Left spent years corrupting and largely destroying all accountability for schools dealing with mentally disturbed students, demanding – and eventually getting – programs that called for “keeping students in school with additional assistance” rather than committing them to mental health facilities where they would get treatment and the public would get protection; the actions that schools are allowed to take has been severely curtailed over the years, driven by leftist plilosophies. The foundation was laid years, if not decades, ago for a catastrophe. All it took was one “student” with sufficiently damaged mental processes, and there are plenty of damaged kids (there always have been, but as a percentage their number increases with population increases), Could it have been planned? I seriously doubt it. If enough disturbed, some severely disturbed, individuals are allowed free rein, institutions denied the ability to deal with them, treatment withheld or misapplied, will one of them, maybe, eventually, sometime, will snap and create a crisis. Is all that a conspiracy? Or is it the implementation of a defective philosophy? Is there a difference between the two? Is a genuinely concerned Leftist advocating non-punitive outpatient treatment of severely mentally damaged individuals instead of incarceration or committment part of a conspiracy? What if George Soros is picking up the tab for his or her advocacy? If the head of the school system and local law enforcement support the Leftist’s philosophy, does that constitute conspiracy?

    If enough illegal aliens are allowed entry to the U.S. will that include a percentage of criminals and will some of those criminals commit crimes with guns that “we must do something about right now”? Is that a plan or a conspiracy? Both? Neither?

    The late Neal Knox argued that “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” How many mass shootings have occurred, and while it may look like conspiracy how can that be proved? Does mass acceptance and advocacy of a defective philosophy constitute conspiracy?

    • That quote is from the movie “Goldfinger” (spoken by the character of that name). I see it referenced in a Neal Knox Report citation as “someone once said”, but it doesn’t look like Neal did so, or claimed it as his.

  5. Don’t forget the BATFE facilitating the sale of thousands of guns to organized crime cartels costing countless lives so they could prove we needed to ban guns.

  6. All they have to do is the exact thing the extremist muslums do to get the suicide bombers. That is find someone who is severely mentally or emotionally handicapped, in other words find someone easy to influence to do what you want, and groom them to do it. Figure out what drives them and push those buttons. If they’re paranoid, push those paranoia buttons and aim them at someone. For the suicide bombers, it is actually harder because they’re going for specific targets. For mass shooters the liberals don’t have to care if it’s a grade school or a walmart. Either is good for a good crisis to make use of.

Comments are closed.