|
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
|
Message Subject
|
MOTIVE??? What was Adam Lanza's MOTIVE??? Why is no-one discussing this? No crime is committed without a motive. OR DID ADAM NOT DO THIS CRIME?
|
|
Poster Handle
|
INK3 |
|
Post Content
|
What motive would the TBTB have?
9/11 had a motive that was put into action immediately, but this?
"Guy snaps for no reason" is easier to swallow than "government kills a bunch of kids for no reason".
Quoting: ExiledKeeper Gun control laws. Disarm the American people. They said the same about Colorado but nothing ever came of it(rumors about the bank as well but those were never confirmed). Disarming the people is an illogical goal. Why would the government want to disarm the people? Not only would retrieving and storing the weapons be a logistical nightmare, if not impossibility, the gun market is a sizable source of revenue inside of the country. Think about it, at this point a revolution would be irrelevant in concern of gun laws as the guns hidden away would remain so(unless you believe that the Government would search 400 millions residences). The Government is not stupid they fully know that the majority of the populace would be against it. It would take a much larger event than this for that to be passed anyway so why didn't they stage a grand event and kill an entire school of kids? 9/11 had a clear goal with immediate consequences(put into action instantaneously), there was no build up or string of crimes to win the public. I say again a man's mind snapping doesn't need a motive, a Government does. Not true. People always snap for a reason, but in any case it doesn't exponentially improve their shot. Also, simply snapping doesn't explain the children being targeted. As for disarming the US public -- this may well be the straw that breaks that particular camel's back. Certainly, rather than to seek a motive on the part of the killer, the MSM has been harping on about gun laws. Why is no-one asking why he did it? Notice also how people are now trained to say 'shooter' rather than 'killer'. While I agree that calling someone a shooter is a descriptive title, a shooter does not necessarily kill. A killer kills. A shooter shoots. But now, in the eyes and minds of the public, a "shooter" is synonymous with "killer". This change has been incremental over the past few years but is now successfully implemented. People now no longer ask: Who's the killer? They ask: Who's the shooter?Guns = death. That's the message wanting to be conveyed. It used to be guns = security and safety. You are so right! Just like in the US, it used to be "illegal alien", then "undocumented immigrant", now it's just "immigrant". Back in the day any student from outside the US was referred to as a foreign student, several years ago they became "International students". Most people don't realize it, but this is a form of mind control.
|
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|
