Patriots in control?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (180)
sorted by:
So I’m not at the point where I believe that psychologists are actively creating mass shooters in support of a political or criminal narrative yet. I am more convincable with LE, but am not convinced it’s hard enough for crazy people to get guns to REQUIRE false flags to see what we see.
There are plenty of guns, and plenty of crazy people, and few barriers between them. Of course mass shootings will happen, with or without false flag involvement.
But that’s fine. I agree with enough of what you’ve written. And I certainly won’t dissuade you from keeping an eye on the medical and mental health fields. It would be awkward for me to embrace my own skepticism if I didn’t feel comfortable with anyone else’s.
That's fair, Fren. We've already seen enough politicization and political pressure to change definitions of words and seemingly re-write existing known biological science in favor of some other clown world bullshit, so I think anything's possible.
My focus is on the role of big pharma in the "problems for profit" model they seem to enjoy running. It's easier to talk to someone for 30 minutes and then hand them a voucher for some pills. We need to assess the rise in pharmaceuticals and what's going on with society that can't be fixed simply by drugging someone up. This isn't a new problem, but it seems it's gotten worse in the last 15 years or so. I'm no expert but my spider senses tell me our media information overload and technological bombardment is resulting in a form of tangible psychosis that certain industries see as a moneymaking opportunity.
Here are some links I gathered that may provide good food for thought for you to consider:
https://www.psychreg.org/antidepressants-ssri-mass-shootings/
https://www.cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/
https://thoughtcatalog.com/jeremy-london/2019/09/37-mass-shooters-who-were-on-antidepressants/
https://www.drugawareness.org/school-shootings-the-evidence-antidepressants-are-the-cause/
I will add them to my reading list.
I am not anti-psych meds, but I have more than enough reasons to keep a close eye on them.
I remember in the days before 2016 when I used to have discussions like this with my conservative friends on Facebook all the time. Nostalgic.
What are your thoughts on this story?
https://newspunch.com/fbi-mentally-ill-son-right-wing-terrorist/
The first thing I notice is that the story relies entirely on two sources:
The letter from the parents insisting the FBI knew about the schizophrenia.
“Federal documents” proving that FBI agents knew about the schizophrenia.
This story was from 2017, so those documents must have existed for a while, but they are not linked in the story that is relying on them, for some reason.
I went hunting for the documents on my own.
https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-varnell-8/
This is the only mention of schizophrenia in these documents:
So, everything in the document that concerns schizophrenia specifically makes the case that the FBI didn’t know and wouldn’t necessarily have known if he wasn’t in mid-episode.
Which is the opposite of what your source claimed.
Of course, the FBI could be lying, no question, but then, it’s just a “he said, she said” with the parents, with no proof on either side, and I can’t take sides without proof.
Now, perhaps your source meant a different set of documents as proof, but since they didn’t provide that proof, and I already tried and failed to provide that proof for them, I’m not really sure where else I can go from here.
To be clear, you won’t bait me into defending the FBI or distasteful practices, but my willingness to accept they could have done this is far more generous than my willingness to accept that this did happen, based purely on your source.
I didn't ask you about the source I picked. I asked you about the story.
So please, feel free to use whatever source of that story you want.
There are several.
And I wasn't trying to bait you into anything. I wanted to know your actual thoughts about that story. So look at all the sources you want, not just the one I posted. And tell me everything that you think. I am genuinely curious.
Alright alright, although “story” isn’t an uncommon way to describe an article, so you can forgive the confusion, I hope.
The official story is that the young man had already established an interest in terrorism, and the FBI does what it does with undercover ops and provided him fake bomb material.
The scandal would be if the FBI did this while believing him to be seriously mentally ill. The evidence on this, as was admitted to court, leaned against that. The only evidence in favor is the insistence of the parents.
So do I have a problem with the FBI giving potential terrorists enough rope to hang themselves with? Not in a sterile context, no.
Do I have a problem with the FBI knowingly manipulating the mentally ill to justify a crackdown on guns? Absolutely.
All the evidence could be a lie and it could be a coverup. But I have no evidence of that, and have known plenty of unstable people in my life capable of violence, so I don’t find anything particularly surprising in the evidence that actually exists and I can read about this case.
If there is something else you want me to find, we’ll need to co-research. I don’t mind digging into specific stories for details, but this board wouldn’t be necessary if any one person had time to dig into the Q layer of every news story. I’ll be happy to read any supplemental material that you think I may have missed.