It is at least extremely reasonable to suspect that this is yet another gun control shooting false flag event since it has many of the characteristics of it.
When you practice something all the time you eventually get very good at it. The one thing many awakened and vigilant Americans have become good at over the past few years is sniffing out government false flags because they have so much practice at it. You may find that the events surrounding the recent Umpqua Community College shooting in southern Oregon may ring a few familiar false flag bells after you consider what the mainstream media is saying about the shooting. It is at least extremely reasonable to suspect that this is yet another gun control shooting false flag event since it has many of the characteristics of it.
Sounds crazy? Yes, it always does. False flags are supposed to divide people in addition to tricking them. But as I’ve said repeatedly in the past, when considering a suspected false flag event you have to start somewhere. Look for the beneficiaries of course and look for common patterns. I think many of us know the patterns by now and what to look for when suspecting a false flag shooting.
The college where the latest shooting took place is located six miles north of Roseburg, Oregon and was a very small town where you would expect everyone to be known to most people yet early on it appears this is not the case. Thirteen so far unknown people are said to be murdered and another 20 wounded.
So, should we believe that the Oregon shooting is legitimate with no government involvement? I would like to think so, but as always many things surrounding this latest shooting force us to consider if we’re dealing with yet another gun grab shooting designed to push anti-gun legislation. With the new world order’s Agenda 2030 pushed last week with help from the Pope, we know that Obama now has gun control as one of the remaining major items on the top of his list before he leaves office in 2016. The administration desperately needs this gun-control agenda to be pushed through and we’ve seen a laundry list of proven false flag shootings over the past several years.
Are you someone who wants to believe this is not so? Then deal with these 13 points which at the very least bring into question this latest shooting.
1 – Grandiose mainstream media headline demanding your attention to this story.
Without the same grandiose mainstream media headline, I myself would not have noticed this story online. Here we go again? This is now the latest 24/7 story that the mainstream media seems to want and need you to be fascinated by. This alone is a huge tell-tale sign no one should overlook.
2 – Immediate call for gun control in the story sub-headlines.
This latest Oregon school shooting comes with no holds barred. Even in the very headline there was a quick post announcing the need for gun control. Whenever you have gun control pushed on you before you can understand what just happened, that should be a red flag.
3 – Obama himself immediately calls for gun control seizing the moment Sandy Hook style.
Obama even admits his desperate gun control agenda is political
“This is something we should politicize,” he said, calling on Americans of all political stripes to hold their elected leaders accountable for acting on the issue.
It goes without saying that whenever Obama jumps into a topic you should run the other way and fast. Very few actions tell me this shooting has an agenda behind it more than seeing Obama immediately calling for gun control on cue. I’m thinking, doesn’t Obama have presidential work to do? Why is he so involved in specific stories that perfectly fit the new world order agenda? Are we to ignore this or consider this timing coincidental?
4 – Shooter is dead as usual.
We all know the script by now and once again and as usual the shooter does not live to tell the tale or defend his intent. That’s because dead men tell no tales. Consequently, the story as usual is left to the story tellers. And with the usual dead shooter there is much less need to worry about any account conflicts or future revelations of government involvement. Some things for everyone to consider are the following – Did the shooter try to lower his gun? What circumstances led to police actually killing the shooter? Are police reports available for us to see? Don’t police disable people any more?? Isn’t there policy for this? Did police follow correct procedure?
5 – Shooter identity completely unknown but repeated mention of “4 guns” very known.
How often does a shooting take place and no one knows who the shooter is (as of the time of this article)? Students didn’t recognize their own classmate? Or did the shooter decide to shoot a bunch of strangers in a school that he’s never attended? How is it that no one knows the shooter? This certainly was not the case in the Virginia Tech shooting of 2007 or Columbine shooting where everyone seem to know or recognize the shooter. Consider this carefully.
6 – “Conflicting reports” in the number of dead people. Identity entirely unknown as well.
Who are these dead people? What are their names? And why is there confusion as to how many people are dead at a small school. Is the body count that high? That difficult? You decide what this might mean given the context of all the facts coming out. It would certainly not be the first time we’ve heard conflicting stories and body counts.
7 – Oregon is recent state of political interest to Neocon former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
It’s not a far stretch to imagine that a good town for a false flag shooting would be one where trusted criminals have influence or are in power. Is it just me or has anyone else been wondering what the heck in former Mayor Bloomberg was doing in Oregon? Is it a coincidence that former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been dumping a lot of money into pushing legislation in Oregon? In the past, others within alternative media have called for watchful eyes in Oregon given this connection. No big deal? You decide.
8 – Social media controversy already brewing.
Recall after the Sandy Hook shooting false flag we saw criminal Lt Paul Vance come on TV and call social media exposure of the Sandy Hook shooting “disinformation” and a “crime” to be “prosecuted.” Similarly, again we are seeing an early immediate attack and discrediting of social media in an attempt to control the information. Perhaps they are doing this knowing that soon more information will come out. Everyone should consider that this social media stunt may be purposely bogus to discredit social media. I suspect this may be what is happening. This is just another attempt by the controllers to condition people into thinking that the only reliable news comes from mainstream media sources.
9 – Initial images and videos show no ambulances, no blood or dead bodies.
If anyone has these images please provide them so we can see them but as of the time of this article this evidence was not available.
This reminds us of almost every shooting false flag where the mainstream media hides the images of the crime scene. Where are the images of the police yellow tape? The blood on the floor? The bodies? The ambulances and emergency vehicles?? By hiding all of these images all of the story and images is left to your imagination and this allows for maximum control of the information.
10 – Shooting has a divisive religious twist to it – opens door for blaming Islam, others later on.
Without any further explanation we’re told that the shooter demanded that his victims state what their religion was before shooting them. No one seems to offer what the intent of this was or what does this mean. Is this an attempt to leave the door open for a possible blaming of ISIS or some other extremist related patsy? Consider that the shooter up to now (the time of this article) can be anyone. Conveniently the controllers have held back the identity of the shooter.
11 – No clear cut witnesses actually saw the shooting.
Yes, believe it or not. After reading the story it appears there are only 3 witnesses accounted for. The closest thing to an eyewitness is Kortney Moore:
Kortney Moore, 18, told the local News Review newspaper that she was in her writing class in Snyder Hall when a gunshot came through the window and struck her teacher in the head.
The remaining 2 supposed witnesses only HEARD the gunfire according to reports.
Student Cassandra Welding told CNN that she heard 35 to 40 shots.
Student Brandy Winter, in a posting on Facebook, said she was in a classroom in Snyder Hall, next door to the room where the shooting began and ran, along with her classmates, when they heard the gunfire.
Winter also says that “from talking with a student in the classroom where it happen, almost every person in the room was shot by a man with four guns,” admitting she herself did not witness the shooting.
Anyone who knows about guns might find this statement a bit peculiar since you can only shoot someone with a gun one bullet at a time. You cannot fire 4 guns at once. Also, studies show that when someone is shot with a gun most of the time they will actually survive the shooting since the bullet must penetrate vital organs. Also people who are severely shot won’t die right away giving them time to potentially tackle the shooter. So it’s not easy to actually shoot and kill a room full of people with 4 guns. Also surely after the first few rounds everyone afraid for their lives would have run full speed out of the room.
So where are the people who actually saw the shooting with their own eyes? And, again, why did no one tackle the shooter as he switched guns given that most likely he could get off no more than 10 rounds at a time? I’m sure we’ll hear from the wounded victims much later on like the interview we saw with Greta Van Susteren and the Virginia Shooting survivor crisis actor.
12 – All students quickly treated as strip-searched suspects instead of victims.
Did the police not want the students to get a good view of the evidence and scene as they passed by? Was this part of the drill to condition students to give up their 4th amendment rights Boston bombing style under shooting conditions? And why were students joking?? Were these students not just exposed to a shocking bloody gruesome scene? I find this a little odd.
“They walked us straight through the crime scene with our hands up,” 18-year-old freshman Andi Dinnetz said. “It was more tense outside. In the classroom, everyone was trying to make jokes and keep it from being as serious as it was.”
13 – Social media manifesto-like messages once again posted to further substantiate shooter intent.
Mainstream media is posting a chain of messages posted by an anonymous character on 4chan.org the night before:
Don’t go to school tomorrow if you are in the northwest.
Once again, a would-be shooter in America whose shooting would quickly serve the gun control agenda just so happens to pre-post threats announcing or hinting at what he is going to do. This is another trademark of false flag shootings.
I want to believe this latest shooting is not a false flag. I have no other information except what mainstream media wants us to know. I (we) have an obligation to receive the information in the right context. And what context is that? That the globalists are desperate and they are running out of time to get more gun legislation in. The context that a month ago they suffered a horrific failure in Virginia when overwhelming evidence clearly shows the shooting was a false flag. Following this, the Virginia TV Reporter shooting disappeared completely from mainstream media news, and it disappeared for a reason. Surprisingly and ironically there was no mention of the late August Virginia TV Reporter shooting in this recent story which, by the way, mentions several of the other shootings from the past. Given that it only happened a month ago isn’t this a little odd?
Also consider this story in the context of the embarrassment that the U.S. is suffering with respect to ISIS being called out and bombed in Syria. The U.S. and the new world order is in the midst of a tumultuous period. They need a victory soon and just as everyone is looking at the ISIS/Syrian crisis failure here comes a new shooting to get your attention away from Syria.
Is this latest shooting a perfectly coincidental event for the globalisst or just another false flag shooting? You consider the evidence for yourself and decide. I’m sure new evidence will emerge. Whether that evidence debunks my suspicions or confirms it will remain to be seen.
Bernie is a revolutionary writer with a background in medicine, psychology, and information technology. He has written numerous articles over the years about freedom, government corruption and conspiracies, and solutions. A former host of the 9/11 Freefall radio show, Bernie is also the creator of the Truth and Art TV project where he shares articles and videos about issues that raise our consciousness and offer solutions to our current problems. His efforts are designed to encourage others to joyfully stand for truth, to expose government tactics of propaganda, fear and deception, and to address the psychology of dealing with the rising new world order. He is also a former U.S. Marine who believes it is our duty to stand for and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. A peace activist, he believes information and awareness is the first step toward being free from enslavement from the globalist control system which now threatens humanity. He believes love conquers all fear and it is up to each and every one of us to manifest the solutions and the change that you want to see in this world, because doing this is the very thing that will ensure victory and restoration of the human race from the rising global enslavement system, and will offer hope to future generations.
Murray N. Rothbard was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism which Hans-Hermann Hoppe described as “Rothbard’s unique contribution to the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.”
This book applies the principles of this “unified moral science” to environmental and natural resource management issues.
The book started out life as an assigned reading list for a university level course entitled Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View.
As I began to prepare to teach the course, I quickly saw that there was a plethora of textbooks suitable for universal level courses dealing with environmental and natural resource economics. The only problem was that they were all based in mainstream neo-classical (or Keynesian) theory. I could find no single collection of material comprising a comprehensive treatment of environmental and natural resource economics based on Austrian Economic Theory.
However, I was able to find a large number of essays, monographs, papers delivered at professional meetings and published from a multitude of sources. This book is the result. It is composed of a collection of research reports and essays by reputable scientists, economists, and legal experts as well as private property and free market activists.
The book is organized into seven parts: I. Environmentalism: The New State Religion; II. The New State Religion Debunked; III. Introduction to Environmental and Natural Resource Economics; IV. Interventionism: Law and Regulation; V. Pollution and Recycling; VI. Property Rights: Planning, Zoning and Eminent Domain; and VII. Free Market Conservation. It also includes an elaborate Bibliography, References and Recommended Reading section including an extensive Annotated Bibliography of related and works on the subject.
The intellectual level of the individual works ranges from quite scholarly to informed editorial opinion.