LAX Shooting Conspiracy Theories - Los Angeles Airport - False Flag Theories

[Alhazred The Sane]

Ciancia was not simply a crazy guy who randomly shot some random person. He quite deliberately went and killed a TSA worker (and intended to kill many more) to "instill fear into their traitorous minds."

So how exactly did he get the idea that TSA workers were traitors? It seems very likely that he got it by listening to something like the type of rhetoric that Oxy used above. Rhetoric that essentially equates TSA workers to something like guards at a Nazi concentration camp.

If he's just a crazy guy who killed someone, then who would have been his target if he'd not happened to hear repeated similar characterizations of TSA workers?

Good points. Of course, now AJ is claiming that it's all a set-up to discredit him, and Glenn Beck.

 

[Oxymoron]

Ciancia was not simply a crazy guy who randomly shot some random person. He quite deliberately went and killed a TSA worker (and intended to kill many more) to "instill fear into their traitorous minds."

So how exactly did he get the idea that TSA workers were traitors? It seems very likely that he got it by listening to something like the type of rhetoric that Oxy used above. Rhetoric that essentially equates TSA workers to something like guards at a Nazi concentration camp.

Great, so now I'm responsible?

Sorry but you are speculating. Do you know what interactions he has had with TSA staff in the past? No? I didn't think you did.

Anything could have made him do it... what's the reason for the other thousands of shootings that go on in the U.S? Pure speculation is not debunking.

And BTW, I am in no way suggesting or promoting any form of violence, simply that people should not give away their hard fought for freedoms just because some power mad politician or CIA/NSA director banker 'wants' you to.

If he's just a crazy guy who killed someone, then who would have been his target if he'd not happened to hear repeated similar characterizations of TSA workers?

And I did not say they were like 'guards at a Nazi concentration camp'. Talk about hyperbole.

But even if I did so what, people liken traffic wardens to 'jumped up little Hitlers' all the time in the U.K... mostly because they are and are taught to be like it as well. But everyone knows what is meant by it and someone would have to be pretty do lally tat to target them because of the preponderance of 'people referring to them as jumped up Hitlers'.

If someone is going to attack one of them it is far more likely to be in the heat of the moment because they are being an officious little prick at the time. Or maybe they have had several run ins and it is the straw that breaks the camels back... who knows?

Metabunk apparently.

 

[O_O]

...

Reread post #52.

 

[Mick West]

Great, so now I'm responsible?

Sorry but you are speculating. Do you know what interactions he has had with TSA staff in the past? No? I didn't think you did.

I said "seems likely", and I think it does seem likely.

You don't call someone "traitorous" and "NWO" just because they gave you an overly invasive search. Those ideas come from the AJ style rhetoric.

 

[Oxymoron]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jjmacnab/2013/11/03/patriot-movement-clues-in-lax-shooting/

According to law enforcement officials, when alleged shooter Paul Anthony Ciancia walked into the Los Angeles International Airport on Friday morning dressed in fatigues, his duffel bag contained a rifle, ammunition, and a one-page letter addressed to the Transportation Security Administration.

Sprinkled among the news reports that followed lay several clues about a possible motive for the shooting, and so far everything points to an act of domestic terrorism carried out by an ideologically driven member of the modern Patriot movement.

"Pissed off Patriot": According to police, Ciancia referred to himself as a Patriot in his note. It's important to keep in mind that members of this loose-knit movement have co-opted a common word associated with courageous and loyal values, and twisted the definition in an effort to paint themselves as heroic figures.

And King George would have said something similar no doubt around the time of the Boston Tea Party nonsense.

The Manifesto: When Timothy McVeigh bombed the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995, he carefully filled an envelope with pamphlets, articles, papers, and Founding Father quotes to explain his rationale for mass murder. When Joseph Stack flew his airplane into the Austin, Texas IRS building in 2010, he left a manifesto on his website. Patriots who commit violent acts know that their individual efforts are too small to effect real change, but hope to inspire others to engage the government violently as well.

So how do you account for McVie as AJ wasn't there to blame then?

Fatigues: Many Patriots assume military-style clothing, weapons, speech, and demeanor in an effort to wrap their activities in a layer of respectability and honor. After all, when American soldiers kill the nation's enemies during war, they return home as heroes. Patriots believe that they too are at war, but their enemy is not a foreign nation or terrorist organization – it's the U.S. government. They dress and act like soldiers so that they can feel like and be judged as brave warriors rather than as murderers.

Political rhetoric for the niave. Anyone walking around in fatigues is a potential terrorist. Prove you are not a terrorist by walking around with your arse exposed and ready for inspection... then 'we will know' you have nothing to hide and are completely docile and compliant to anything.

The Firearm: The M&P15 ("Military and Police") semi-automatic tactical rifle falls into the AR-15 class of weapons, which is preferred by Patriots for a number of reasons. Such guns are inexpensive, easy to shoot, accurate, customizable, and for a 10-year period starting in 1994, this type of rifle was banned by federal law, which gives the weapon a certain prestige among Patriot groups. Despite the M&P name, Smith & Wesson has actively marketed the rifle to civilian shooters.

Irrelevant nonsense.

TSA as a Target: The Transportation Security Administration is a relatively new agency, and is part of the Department of Homeland Security. According to the indictment, Ciancia wrote that he had "made a conscious decision to kill" multiple TSA employees, and indeed, he fired his weapon mostly at TSA agents, killing one, injuring others and injuring one airline passenger. While Patriots traditionally have not included the TSA on their list of enemies, considerable animosity and threats have been aimed at the IRS, the DHS, Federal judges, the FBI, the Federal Reserve, the ATF, FEMA, and the EPA in the past. According to one news report, Ciancia also lashed out at former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in his letter, calling her a "bull-dyke."

Amazing the info you can infer from the tiny, out of context 'quotes'. Fill in the blanks by writing what you want and 'no one will notice' and will plaster it all over the net as 'evidence'.

Fiat currency/NWO: In his manifesto, Ciancia referred to "fiat currency" and the "NWO," likely a reference to the New World Order conspiracy theory. Under this Patriot myth, when the U.S. government stopped backing the dollar with gold reserves, the power to create and control money was passed to a cartel of secretive international bankers, who continue to use their power today to keep all Americans in economic slavery. Jared Loughner had a similar fascination with fiat currency conspiracy theories.

More 'quotes'... spect the NSA rifled his emails to come up with that or maybe trawled through his phone tap recordings.

Domestic Terrorism: And finally, according to the FBI, Ciancia was fairly explicit about his goals. He wrote that he wanted to "kill TSA and pigs" in order to "instill fear in your terrorist minds." Once again, in the Patriot movement, language is key; a man who walks into a crowded airport and shoots several unarmed people isn't a killer, he is a patriotic soldier in the epic battle against the terrorist organization called the U.S. government.

More inciteful quotes. And no, I did not mean insightful. Amazing how things can be written around and used as evidence.

On November 2, 2013, Ciancia was charged with killing a federal agent and intentionally performing an act of violence at an airport, and faces a possible death sentence if he survives his injuries from the shootout with officers. Contrary to his efforts to make himself look like a patriotic hero, he'll be judged by his acts rather than his words.

Guess he will.

 

[Oxymoron]

I said "seems likely", and I think it does seem likely.

You don't call someone "traitorous" and "NWO" just because they gave you an overly invasive search. Those ideas come from the AJ style rhetoric.

Well depending on the circumstances, I would and they would be damn lucky if that's all they got as well.

 

[Mick West]

Well depending on the circumstances, I would and they would be damn lucky if that's all they got as well.

And should not the penalty for traitors be death?

You don't mean that of course, but you still call them traitors.

 

[Oxymoron]

And should not the penalty for traitors be death?

You don't mean that of course, but you still call them traitors.

Traitorous has many connotations. A spouse who is unfaithful can be said to be traitorous but obviously it covers a wide range of percieved transgressions.

Being traitorous to the constitution or an accepted idea of right and wrong, to 'humanity' or 'humanitarian principles, an appalling misuse of power but then we go down the oft trodden path of semantics once again.

 

[O_O]

According to law enforcement officials, when alleged shooter Paul Anthony Ciancia walked into the Los Angeles International Airport on Friday morning dressed in fatigues, his duffel bag contained a rifle, ammunition, and a one-page letter addressed to the Transportation Security Administration.

Sprinkled among the news reports that followed lay several clues about a possible motive for the shooting, and so far everything points to an act of domestic terrorism carried out by an ideologically driven member of the modern Patriot movement.

"Pissed off Patriot": According to police, Ciancia referred to himself as a Patriot in his note. It's important to keep in mind that members of this loose-knit movement have co-opted a common word associated with courageous and loyal values, and twisted the definition in an effort to paint themselves as heroic figures.

And King George would have said something similar no doubt around the time of the Boston Tea Party nonsense.

Check, please. It's the quality of thought, not the opinions that lead me to use the "ignore" function for the first time. My Metabunk reading experiences will perhaps be a little less bunky.

 

[Oxymoron]

Rather hyperbolic Oxy. If they had won, they would stop. Clearly their intent was not just slightly more annoying security procedures. They want to stop US involvement in muslim countries.

Yes that is true, they do want the U.S to stop invading and killing people in the muslim world and why shouldn't they want that?
http://rt.com/usa/obama-book-drones-killing-198/

According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London, the president has authorized 326 strikes in Pakistan alone. It also estimates that, since George W. Bush took office for his second term in 2004, the strikes have killed anywhere between 2,500 and 3,600 individuals, and that between 416 and 948 of those individuals were civilians.

The White House claims the number of civilians killed by drones is much lower than that, though it has declined to release its own number for national security reasons. The administration considers any "military-age males" within a strike zone to be combatants.

But it is much more than, " just slightly more annoying security procedures", (note extensive quote), as can be seen by the fact that over 70 organisations have co-written an open letter to Cameron on the subject of 'eroding human rights'. I don't know if they felt it was a pointless exercise writing to Obama... (just conjecture there).

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/03/human-rights-groups-letter-david-cameron

Dear Prime Minister,

We have joined together as an international coalition of free speech, media freedom and human rights organisations because we believe that the United Kingdom government's response to the revelations of mass surveillance of digital communications is eroding fundamental human rights in the country. The government's response has been to condemn, rather than celebrate, investigative journalism, which plays a crucial role in a healthy democratic society.

We are alarmed at the way in which the UK government has reacted, using national security legislation against those who have helped bring this public interest information to global attention. We are concerned about:

• The use of Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to detain the Brazilian media worker, David Miranda on 18 August 2013 at London Heathrow Airport. Miranda was carrying journalistic material on behalf of the UK's Guardian newspaper and is the partner of the journalist, Glenn Greenwald, who broke the story of mass surveillance of digital communications by the UK and USA

• The sustained pressure against the UK's Guardian newspaper for reporting the disclosures of whistleblower, Edward Snowden, including sending officials to force the Guardian to destroy hard drives allegedly containing information from Snowden

• Your call on 16 October 2013 for a House of Commons Select Committee to review whether the Guardian has damaged national security by publishing material provided by Edward Snowden, and a subsequent announcement that the review will be conducted by the Home Affairs Select Committee as part of their inquiry into anti-terrorism.

We believe these actions clearly violate the right to freedom of expression, which is protected under British, European and international law. Under such laws, the right to freedom of expression includes the protection of both journalists, and those that assist them in the course of their vital work.

"Edward Snowden, David Miranda, Glenn Greenwald and the Guardian are being painted as the villains of this piece. They are being targeted for raising a matter of serious public interest. This seems to be a convenient distraction from what might otherwise be a story about state overreach and inadequate oversight of power,"

 

[Mick West]

There are perfectly valid criticisms of the DHS/TSA etc. And there are a variety of opinions about it.

This does not change the fact that that portraying TSA agents as "Traitors" or agents of the NWO is akin to putting a target on them. Alex Jones is basically saying that TSA are facist scumbags.

 

[Oxymoron]

There are perfectly valid criticisms of the DHS/TSA etc. And there are a variety of opinions about it.

This does not change the fact that that portraying TSA agents as "Traitors" or agents of the NWO is akin to putting a target on them. Alex Jones is basically saying that TSA are facist scumbags.

And many people regard the U.S as either a fascist police state or at least 'well on its way'. In order for a fascist state to run, it needs people who are willing to enforce its policies, (whether that be for simply financial reward, (pay), or ideological reasons as well).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism

Originally, "fascism" referred to a political movement that was linked with corporatism and existed in a single country (Italy) for less than 30 years and ruled the country from 1922 to 1943 under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. Clearly, if the definition is restricted to the original Italian Fascism, then "fascism" has little significance outside of Italian politics. Most scholars prefer to use the word "fascism" in a more general sense, to refer to an ideology (or group of ideologies) that was influential in many countries at many different times. For this purpose, they have sought to identify a "fascist minimum" - that is, the minimum conditions that a certain political group must meet in order to be considered fascist. Several scholars have inspected the apocalyptic, millennial and millenarian aspects of fascism.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] According to most scholars of fascism, there are both left and right influences on fascism as a social movement, and fascism, especially once in power, has historically attacked communism, conservatism and parliamentary liberalism, attracting support primarily from the "far right" or "extreme right."[8]

The notion of "totalitarianism"; a "total" political power by state was formulated in 1923 by Giovanni Amendola who described Italian Fascism as a system fundamentally different from conventional dictatorships.[8] The term was later assigned a positive meaning in the writings of Giovanni Gentile, Italy's most prominent philosopher and leading theorist of fascism. He used the term "totalitario" to refer to the structure and goals of the new state. The new state was to provide the "total representation of the nation and total guidance of national goals."[9] He described totalitarianism as a society in which the ideology of the state had influence, if not power, over most of its citizens.[10] According to Benito Mussolini, this system politicizes everything spiritual and human:

Naturally, he is referring to more than the 'usual/accepted' powers over its citizens, otherwise all states would be 'totalitarian'.

George Bush's call for 'Patriotism' and 'You are either with us or against us' rhetoric, effectively attempting to stifle dissent from his policies, could easily be interpreted as fascist/totalitarian. Add to that the raft of legislation and enforcement against public dissent and is it any wonder why many people see the TSA (who frequently abuse their already over extensive powers) as being one of many fascist arms of a fascist or fascist moving government.

So are you saying people should not be allowed to criticise their governments or their agencies as 'fascist', even when they are carrying out fascist actions; on the off chance that someone may over react?

If AJ and many others believe it, (and it seems they do), are you saying they must not voice their views... just in case?

BTW Mick, I have to take my hat off to you in fielding such a diverse array of criticisms as you do.

 

[Mick West]

If AJ and many others believe it, (and it seems they do), are you saying they must not voice their views... just in case?

Fact based views are fine. Saying there's too much of a trend in law enforcement towards paramilitary over-authoritarianism is fine. Saying there's a lot of CCDTVs is fine. Saying airport security is mostly a waste of time is fine. Say the President is abusing his authority with extrajudicial executions/murder is fine.

But you know AJ goes way beyond this. He instilling very immediate fears of WWIII, and of people being herded into FEMA camps. He paints people like TSA as being complicit participants in these schemes. People who a "freedom fighter" might want to target, to do some good. Kill a few of them to "instill fear into their traitorous minds."

I encourage you to criticism the government, just criticize what they do, not some crazy imagined version of what Alex Jones pretends they do.

 

[JeffreyNotGeoffrey]

I remember when Obama was first elected the Christian station around here took calls talking about how terrible he is. One caller promptly asked when the revolution to take back the country was going to be. Those hosts IMMEDIATELY walked things back and said that it will occur at the ballot box to get Obama and his allies out. I hated their usual message, but that was the best deflection I've seen. They dialed it down and said that he is the President. Either wait him out or vote him out.

 

[AluminumTheory]

Alex Jones claims to have warned multiple times last week of a mass shooting at the TSA


I listened to his show quite a bit last week and I don't recall hearing him say that.

 

[Mick West]

Alex Jones claims to have warned multiple times last week of a mass shooting at the TSA


I listened to his show quite a bit last week and I don't recall hearing him say that.

I remember him saying quite recently (more than a week ago though) that there would soon be a new false-flag shooter that "they" would claim was an AJ fan, to stitch him up.

 

[AluminumTheory]

According to law enforcement officials, when alleged shooter Paul Anthony Ciancia walked into the Los Angeles International Airport on Friday morning dressed in fatigues, his duffel bag contained a rifle, ammunition, and a one-page letter addressed to the Transportation Security Administration.

Sprinkled among the news reports that followed lay several clues about a possible motive for the shooting, and so far everything points to an act of domestic terrorism carried out by an ideologically driven member of the modern Patriot movement.

"Pissed off Patriot": According to police, Ciancia referred to himself as a Patriot in his note. It's important to keep in mind that members of this loose-knit movement have co-opted a common word associated with courageous and loyal values, and twisted the definition in an effort to paint themselves as heroic figures.

And King George would have said something similar no doubt around the time of the Boston Tea Party nonsense.

Perhaps.

The Manifesto: When Timothy McVeigh bombed the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995, he carefully filled an envelope with pamphlets, articles, papers, and Founding Father quotes to explain his rationale for mass murder. When Joseph Stack flew his airplane into the Austin, Texas IRS building in 2010, he left a manifesto on his website. Patriots who commit violent acts know that their individual efforts are too small to effect real change, but hope to inspire others to engage the government violently as well.

So how do you account for McVie as AJ wasn't there to blame then?

I don't suppose that you read enough of the artilce to understand that they weren't blaming Alex Jones for OKC. They were detailing the similarities between McVeigh and Ciancia both having manifestos and patriot propaganda to explain their rationales. This article isn't blaming Jones nor anyone specific. They're building a profile and drawing similarities between him and other right wing terrorists, and patriot extremists groups.

Fatigues: Many Patriots assume military-style clothing, weapons, speech, and demeanor in an effort to wrap their activities in a layer of respectability and honor. After all, when American soldiers kill the nation's enemies during war, they return home as heroes. Patriots believe that they too are at war, but their enemy is not a foreign nation or terrorist organization – it's the U.S. government. They dress and act like soldiers so that they can feel like and be judged as brave warriors rather than as murderers.

Political rhetoric for the niave. Anyone walking around in fatigues is a potential terrorist. Prove you are not a terrorist by walking around with your arse exposed and ready for inspection... then 'we will know' you have nothing to hide and are completely docile and compliant to anything.

Nice strawman. Neither the article nor anyone here has ever said that people who wear military style fatigues are terrorists. It's relevant because it's just one of many other clues that fit a profile of a right wing extremist.

The Firearm: The M&P15 ("Military and Police") semi-automatic tactical rifle falls into the AR-15 class of weapons, which is preferred by Patriots for a number of reasons. Such guns are inexpensive, easy to shoot, accurate, customizable, and for a 10-year period starting in 1994, this type of rifle was banned by federal law, which gives the weapon a certain prestige among Patriot groups. Despite the M&P name, Smith & Wesson has actively marketed the rifle to civilian shooters.

Irrelevant nonsense.

See above.

TSA as a Target: The Transportation Security Administration is a relatively new agency, and is part of the Department of Homeland Security. According to the indictment, Ciancia wrote that he had "made a conscious decision to kill" multiple TSA employees, and indeed, he fired his weapon mostly at TSA agents, killing one, injuring others and injuring one airline passenger. While Patriots traditionally have not included the TSA on their list of enemies, considerable animosity and threats have been aimed at the IRS, the DHS, Federal judges, the FBI, the Federal Reserve, the ATF, FEMA, and the EPA in the past. According to one news report, Ciancia also lashed out at former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in his letter, calling her a "bull-dyke."

Amazing the info you can infer from the tiny, out of context 'quotes'. Fill in the blanks by writing what you want and 'no one will notice' and will plaster it all over the net as 'evidence'.

Well there are multiple sources confirming that he wrote these. But we don't have the full manifesto yet. But when it's made public we all can get together and see if and how 'context' can change the meaning of statements like "instill fear into their traitorous minds" and "kill TSA and pigs".

Fiat currency/NWO: In his manifesto, Ciancia referred to "fiat currency" and the "NWO," likely a reference to the New World Order conspiracy theory. Under this Patriot myth, when the U.S. government stopped backing the dollar with gold reserves, the power to create and control money was passed to a cartel of secretive international bankers, who continue to use their power today to keep all Americans in economic slavery. Jared Loughner had a similar fascination with fiat currency conspiracy theories.

More 'quotes'... spect the NSA rifled his emails to come up with that or maybe trawled through his phone tap recordings.

I suspect that those are radical ideas that Ciancia got from a certain talk show host spreading bunk and paranoia.

Domestic Terrorism: And finally, according to the FBI, Ciancia was fairly explicit about his goals. He wrote that he wanted to "kill TSA and pigs" in order to "instill fear in your terrorist minds." Once again, in the Patriot movement, language is key; a man who walks into a crowded airport and shoots several unarmed people isn't a killer, he is a patriotic soldier in the epic battle against the terrorist organization called the U.S. government.

More inciteful quotes. And no, I did not mean insightful. Amazing how things can be written around and used as evidence.

So a manifesto that details the specific intent of the shooter is not evidence?

I think you're just deliberately ignoring the evidence so you can play the contrarian.

 

[AluminumTheory]

I remember him saying quite recently (more than a week ago though) that there would soon be a new false-flag shooter that "they" would claim was an AJ fan, to stitch him up.

Well, that would be something that he does nearly every day. Actually predicting something with more than vague details such as naming a target would be a huge step up for him and his predictive capabilities.


Something else that just came to mind.
I was reading about Paul Ciancia and has suicidal thoughts. It's pretty obvious at this point that this kid had some mental health issues. And he doesn't seem to have any known medical history of psychiatric issues which means that he may not have been treated.

If I'm not mistaken, the late teens/early 20's are the period for which many psychiatric conditions manifest themselves. The reason I bring this up is because Alex Jones, Mike Adams, and his other lackeys regularly preach against the use of psychotropic drugs, and the practice of psychology in favor their 'natural' remedies. Alex Jones referred to psychotropic drugs as suicide pills on Piers Morgan and even claims that anti suicide educations is causing people to commit suicide. It might be leap of speculation, but what if Ciancia decided to not seek treatment or rejected treatment because of their propaganda?

I have an immediate relative who is a paranoid schizophrenic, and when not medicated, her symptoms are extremely evident and her medication is literally the only thing that keeps here together. I don't even want to imagine her being off her meds while listening to someone like Alex Jones.

 

[JRBids]

I suggest reasonable and prudent precautions which are not overly and unnecessarily invasive the same as I suggest reasonable surveillance on people who have given reasonable cause to warrant such surveillance... not every damn person on the internet or users of a phone or everyone who posts a letter.

Would that have stopped the 9/11 hijackers?

 

[JRBids]

And many people regard the U.S as either a fascist police state or at least 'well on its way'. In order for a fascist state to run, it needs people who are willing to enforce its policies, (whether that be for simply financial reward, (pay), or ideological reasons as well).

And many of those people who believe that listen to Jones.

Yes that is true, they do want the U.S to stop invading and killing people in the muslim world and why shouldn't they want that?

That's ALL they want? Doubt that.

 

[Alhazred The Sane]

Traitorous has many connotations. A spouse who is unfaithful can be said to be traitorous but obviously it covers a wide range of percieved transgressions.

Think you're mixing 'treacherous' with 'traitorous'. The first word is a catch-all, and can be used to mean disloyal, deceitful, untrustworthy, duplicitous, false, untrue, unreliable, unfaithful, faithless, double-crossing, double-dealing, perfidious, traitorous, treasonable, etc. The latter is used more to reference the nature of an actual traitor, ie someone who has betrayed their country, or in specific terms someone who has betrayed you personally. Invasions of privacy can't really be called traitorous unless you personally know the TSA agent who's finger is up your ass.

 

[Cairenn]

I have a friend that is a paranoid schizophrenic, and she is on medication and yet she says her first decision every day is not kill someone.

 

[Oxymoron]

Fact based views are fine. Saying there's too much of a trend in law enforcement towards paramilitary over-authoritarianism is fine. Saying there's a lot of CCDTVs is fine. Saying airport security is mostly a waste of time is fine. Say the President is abusing his authority with extrajudicial executions/murder is fine.

But you know AJ goes way beyond this. He instilling very immediate fears of WWIII, and of people being herded into FEMA camps. He paints people like TSA as being complicit participants in these schemes. People who a "freedom fighter" might want to target, to do some good. Kill a few of them to "instill fear into their traitorous minds."

I encourage you to criticism the government, just criticize what they do, not some crazy imagined version of what Alex Jones pretends they do.

Surely that's what debunking people like AJ is supposed to be about... debunking where he is wrong but not 'blaming him for events'... that is pure speculation.

I think many on here have the cart before the horse by saying AJ is 'radicalising people'. I think it is the other way around, i.e. there are millions of people out there who believe this stuff and to be fair, there is a lot of truth in it, and AJ has tailored his approach to be popular with those people.

So they would be there without AJ anyway, as they were there before AJ became popular.

A lot of people do not want to discuss semantics or debate the finer points, they want it black and white and angry because that is how they see it and AJ, expresses it that way for them. They will never change and are not interested in going into the minutiae.

My point is, as with RT, TPTB should stop feeding them the massive quantity of ammunition that they do by all their illegal, hypocritical and immoral activities.

To wit:
Carrying or farming out torture whilst condemning it.
Killing civilians on mass whilst condemning it.
Carrying out terrorism whilst condemning it.
Locking people up for stealing a loaf of bread whilst slapping massive fraudsters on the wrist with fines which represent a tiny fraction of what they have stolen.

And BTW, there are a lot of people who classify the current circumstances as actually being 'WW3'.

 

[Oxymoron]

Think you're mixing 'treacherous' with 'traitorous'. The first word is a catch-all, and can be used to mean disloyal, deceitful, untrustworthy, duplicitous, false, untrue, unreliable, unfaithful, faithless, double-crossing, double-dealing, perfidious, traitorous, treasonable, etc. The latter is used more to reference the nature of an actual traitor, ie someone who has betrayed their country, or in specific terms someone who has betrayed you personally. Invasions of privacy can't really be called traitorous unless you personally know the TSA agent who's finger is up your ass.

I think you are wrong but as I said I don't really want to tread the semantics road again. But to my mind, treacherous signifies 'dangerous or deceptive' like 'That ice is treacherous' or that is a treacherous person, i.e. a deceiver.

Whereas the traitorous is more to do with someone who is supposed to be trusted, especially with regards to the running of a state or country, who is acting against the historical norms/tenets of that state or country. A government can be traitorous and the people who serve that government can be traitorous... if it/they are subverting the accepted structure of what that country is supposed to stand for.

As the U.S is supposed to be run 'for the People by the People', (note capitals), when that is subverted, people will likely view that they have been betrayed and the country has been betrayed.

 

[Oxymoron]

And many of those people who believe that listen to Jones.



That's ALL they want? Doubt that.

What do you think they want?

 

[Oxymoron]

Perhaps.

I don't suppose that you read enough of the artilce to understand that they weren't blaming Alex Jones for OKC. They were detailing the similarities between McVeigh and Ciancia both having manifestos and patriot propaganda to explain their rationales. This article isn't blaming Jones nor anyone specific. They're building a profile and drawing similarities between him and other right wing terrorists, and patriot extremists groups.

What I see on here is people attempting, (very badly), to apportion blame on AJ for someone else's actions and putting up a diatribe of pseudo nonsense as 'evidence'... which it isn't and if I were to put up 'evidence' of such rubbish nature to underpin a CT, I would probably get banned or at least pounced on.

Nice strawman. Neither the article nor anyone here has ever said that people who wear military style fatigues are terrorists. It's relevant because it's just one of many other clues that fit a profile of a right wing extremist.

It is obvious what they are trying to do. it isn't even in the least subtle.

Well there are multiple sources confirming that he wrote these. But we don't have the full manifesto yet. But when it's made public we all can get together and see if and how 'context' can change the meaning of statements like "instill fear into their traitorous minds" and "kill TSA and pigs".

Maybe he did but do you have sources? And why write a huge speculative, inflammatory article based on half a dozen quoted words which are not even 100 percent validated?

I suspect that those are radical ideas that Ciancia got from a certain talk show host spreading bunk and paranoia.

What you 'suspect' is neither here nor there.

So a manifesto that details the specific intent of the shooter is not evidence?

I think you're just deliberately ignoring the evidence so you can play the contrarian.

I think you are deliberately manufacturing 'evidence' to suit your dislike of AJ.

 

[AluminumTheory]

Surely that's what debunking people like AJ is supposed to be about... debunking where he is wrong but not 'blaming him for events'... that is pure speculation.

At this point it would be speculation and nobody here is denying that. But it's most certainly not baseless speculation. The is alot of evidence to suggest that he was influenced by Alex Jones at some point as the terms quoted in Ciancas manifesto are things are exactly like what Alex Jones rants about everyday. The resemblance is undeniably more alike to Jones' rhetoric than that of his contemporaries like Glenn Beck.

My guess is that sooner later we will find out what drove him to kill that TSA officer. If you're so confident that were just speculating nonsense than all you have to do is wait and when our flawed logic has been revealed, you can have a nice laugh at us all.

 

[Oxymoron]

Would that have stopped the 9/11 hijackers?

Everyone knows that you cannot stop terrorism. The M.E is awash with it despite all the security and billions spent. If someone wishes to build a bomb or shoot some people and they do not care if they are killed doing it, it is virtually impossible to stop them, unless they are pretty damn stupid.

Yes 'normal' security measures such as those employed in Europe and as cited by Alhazred, are effective for airlines.

 

[Oxymoron]

At this point it would be speculation and nobody here is denying that. But it's most certainly not baseless speculation. The is alot of evidence to suggest that he was influenced by Alex Jones at some point as the terms quoted in Ciancas manifesto are things are exactly like what Alex Jones rants about everyday. The resemblance is undeniably more alike to Jones' rhetoric than that of his contemporaries like Glenn Beck.

My guess is that sooner later we will find out what drove him to kill that TSA officer. If you're so confident that were just speculating nonsense than all you have to do is wait and when our flawed logic has been revealed, you can have a nice laugh at us all.

Like I said previously, AJ is more a reflection of his viewers, 'already established views', rather than the other way around. Which came first, 'the chicken or the egg'... That's rhetorical BTW.

But yes we will wait and see.

 

[Oxymoron]

I remember when Obama was first elected the Christian station around here took calls talking about how terrible he is. One caller promptly asked when the revolution to take back the country was going to be. Those hosts IMMEDIATELY walked things back and said that it will occur at the ballot box to get Obama and his allies out. I hated their usual message, but that was the best deflection I've seen. They dialed it down and said that he is the President. Either wait him out or vote him out.

Yes very laudable. Shame the U.S Govt doesn't take the same view instead of staging coups to oust democratically elected leaders.

 

[JRBids]

What do you think they want?

Here is the part of your post I was addressing:

↑Mick said:
Rather hyperbolic Oxy. If they had won, they would stop. Clearly their intent was not just slightly more annoying security procedures. They want to stop US involvement in muslim countries.


Oxy said:
Yes that is true, they do want the U.S to stop invading and killing people in the muslim world and why shouldn't they want that?

I figured by "they" you meant terrorists, because you were answering Mick, who said "IF THEY had one...." I disagree they want us to stop invading and killing people because they also wage a terror war on other countries that are not invading and killing Muslims, such as Indonesia.

Of course your use of the word "they" did not specificy clearly who they are. Which is pretty typical use of the word. It's usually some nebulous "they".

 

[JRBids]

Like I said previously, AJ is more a reflection of his viewers, 'already established views', rather than the other way around. Which came first, 'the chicken or the egg'... That's rhetorical BTW.

But yes we will wait and see.

The seed of the views may already be established but the roots may not be as deep as once AJ gets through watering them. Much like some people may say, " gee there are a lot of those plane trails in the sky nowadays", it takes someone like Tanner or Bliss or Wiggington to really water that thought and grow it into a state where someone like AJ can influence someone (who may even have a screenshot posted on the "violence" thread here) to actually shoot someone.

 

[Oxymoron]

Here is the part of your post I was addressing:


I figured by "they" you meant terrorists, because you were answering Mick, who said "IF THEY had one...." I disagree they want us to stop invading and killing people because they also wage a terror war on other countries that are not invading and killing Muslims, such as Indonesia.

Of course your use of the word "they" did not specificy clearly who they are. Which is pretty typical use of the word. It's usually some nebulous "they".

Seems a bit nebulous tbh, but if that were true, how does that justify the U.S killing millions of people half way around the world?

 

[JRBids]

Seems a bit nebulous tbh, but if that were true, how does that justify the U.S killing millions of people half way around the world?

Where and when? IN which altercations?

 

[qed]

Indonesia. Now there is a can of CIA conspiracies. In Indonesia, are al-Qaeda the good guys or the bad guys?

 

[Oxymoron]

The seed of the views may already be established but the roots may not be as deep as once AJ gets through watering them. Much like some people may say, " gee there are a lot of those plane trails in the sky nowadays", it takes someone like Tanner or Bliss or Wiggington to really water that thought and grow it into a state where someone like AJ can influence someone (who may even have a screenshot posted on the "violence" thread here) to actually shoot someone.

The names make no difference...they are just people who believe as others do but articulate well, (to some people, i.e. like minded).

The 'chemtrails thing' makes no sense to me and seems like the phenomena that people were 'afraid the electricity was going to come out of the plug sockets akill them in the night', simply a fear of what they do not understand but wars and drones and nefarious dealings of banksters/corporations and politicians is not a theory and is very evident.

Like I said, TPTB could easily alleviate these fears by stopping what they do... but they don't and most people do not like it.

 

[Oxymoron]

Indonesia. Now there is a can of CIA conspiracies. In Indonesia, are al-Qaeda the good guys or the bad guys?

Of course it is a can of worms and deliberately so, it is meant to obfuscate and misdirect from:

how does that justify the U.S killing millions of people half way around the world?

 

[JRBids]

Of course it is a can of worms and deliberately so, it is meant to obfuscate and misdirect from:

I wasn't trying to obfuscate, I was asking why, if they're mad at us for killing people in muslim countries, they commit terror in INdonesia.

And the reason I asked what you were talking about in your question "how does that justify the U.S killing millions of people half way around the world?" is not because I do not think the US is killing people but because sometimes it is justified and sometimes it isn't. Should we have gone to Afghanistan to get bin Laden? Absolutely. Should we have gone into Iraq? Nope. Should we stay out of other people's business in the M.E. yes we should. And they should stay out of ours too.

 

[Oxymoron]

I wasn't trying to obfuscate, I was asking why, if they're mad at us for killing people in muslim countries, they commit terror in INdonesia.

And the reason I asked what you were talking about in your question "how does that justify the U.S killing millions of people half way around the world?" is not because I do not think the US is killing people but because sometimes it is justified and sometimes it isn't. Should we have gone to Afghanistan to get bin Laden? Absolutely. Should we have gone into Iraq? Nope. Should we stay out of other people's business in the M.E. yes we should. And they should stay out of ours too.

You should know perfectly well that going to Afghanistan had absolutely zero to do with 'getting bin Laden, (who wasn't even wanted officially) and everything to do with geopolitical aims in seizing/extending power in the M.E.

1) They could have taken out bin Laden when they had him surrounded but they let him go. Many, inc me, will say that was deliberate because otherwise they would have had absolutely zero legitimacy in invading and occupying and putting in place a puppet regime; as opposed to virtually zero legitimacy.

2) They could have taken out bin Laden with a surgical team, (as they allegedly did in the end anyway).

No, don't come all that old nonsense because none of it flies.

Top down, PNAC says it all. It is there in plain sight but no doubt you will deny and defend the same as you deny and defend the loss of civil liberties and expect everyone to offer themselves up for cavity searches just because you are happy to do so.

 

[Mick West]

Topic drift warning.....

Oxy, you can't tell people not to speculate about Ciancia, and then go off and speculate about the US government.

And "cavity searches" is just the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that's the problem here. We don't get cavity searches when we fly.

I'm blaming you Oxy. A tiny little bit.