Conspiracy Theories Aren’t Always False, Just Unpopular
July 26, 2012 by Sam Rolley
In the wake of the tragic events that occurred in Aurora, Colo., last week, the familiar media trend of mindless chatter, finger-pointing and political polarization has emerged. Americans following the case continue to get a slow trickle of facts about the alleged shooter, James Holmes, and his past, along with continual analysis about what his mindset may have been from criminology and psychology experts.
There are people focusing on the smaller, more sociably acceptable reasoning as to why Holmes is alleged to have carried out the horrific slaughter.
The narrative plays something like: Holmes was a loner whose mother said had a socially reclusive history. Potentially a lonely sex fiend, the man frequented prostitutes in his locale. A lifetime “nerd,” he had faced considerable stress of late as his grades failed in his Ph.D. studies and he removed himself from the program. Holmes spent much of his time locked in his apartment — which he faced losing because he was no longer a student — with lights low playing video games and frequenting online message boards and sex sites. His neighbors didn’t know very much about him.
His online footprint is miniscule, his criminal record nonexistent; there was “no reason for him to be on anyone’s radar.” As it continues, the narrative will likely paint a portrait of a mentally disturbed man who became infatuated by the infamy of his favorite evil movie characters, driven to leave his own nasty mark on society by isolation, mental illness and sadism nurtured by what he deems societal failure to accept him and others like him.
Indeed, the media are already reporting on how the man behaves in his jail cell as he is “trying very hard to act crazy.” He refuses to cooperate with investigators, according to some accounts.
The political consequences of Holmes’ alleged actions are yet to be known, but the rhetoric from lawmakers and opinion shapers has already heated up. It began with media attempting to unsuccessfully link Holmes to political movements like the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street, and continued successfully into a conversation about gun rights and Internet privacy.
At a news conference on Monday, Attorney General Eric Holder, whose Justice Department is complicit in arming Mexican drug cartels, said that the government must now think about the way in which the shooter acquired his AR-15, two Glock handguns, Remington shotgun, body armor and thousands of rounds.
“We have tried to come up with a better system with our instant background checks so that we have the ability to make sure that people who have emotional problems, people who have felony records, other people cannot get access to these kinds of weapons,” Holder said.
New York Nanny Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggested that police officers throughout the country should go on strike until the 2nd Amendment is suspended.
Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) — whose husband was killed in a shooting in 1993 — offered with regard to high-capacity magazines, “It befuddles me to think those things should be sold to the general public.”
The fact that Holmes used the Internet to purchase some of the supplies he allegedly used to carry out his crime has also led some lawmakers to suggest that more online spying by government agencies would catch people like him before they act.
There are factions that stand to reap political rewards if Americans accept the mainstream story and subsequent national conversation surrounding the events in Aurora. And for this reason, a small minority of Americans have risked being deemed conspiracy theorists by their peers because they are considering alternatives to the “official” story of events.
Gun control is an issue of perpetual debate in the United States. The most recent threat to the 2nd Amendment has come in the form of a U.N. small arms treaty drafted to fight “terror” and rebellion by taking guns out of the hands of “non-state actors” — read, private citizens — of signing countries. The treaty has been met with support by some U.S. officials, including the President, but has also received harsh criticism from U.S. gun owners and the National Rifle Association. While, if enacted, the treaty would not instantly ban firearms in the United States, it would create difficulties for gun owners such as making it more difficult for hunters and sportsmen to travel internationally, possibly creating a gun registration in the United States and even banning certain guns. The treaty and NRA’s fierce opposition were making headlines in the days leading up to the Aurora events.
And remember how Holmes wasn’t on “anyone’s radar?” For months, the debate about online privacy from government spying has raged as Congress offers up one after another acronym-laden bill to give the Federal government unchecked access to online information. Each one has been met with fierce public opposition. But now, Americans are offered this from a Wall Street Journal columnist:
The Colorado shooter Mr. Holmes dropped out of school via email. He tried to join a shooting range with phone calls and emails going back and forth. He bought weapons and bomb-making equipment. He placed orders at various websites for a large quantity of ammunition. Aside from privacy considerations, is there anything in principle to stop government computers, assuming they have access to the data, from algorithmically detecting the patterns of a mass shooting in the planning stages?
The columnist goes on to suggest that now is the perfect time for Americans to willingly relinquish any expectation of protection under the 4th Amendment, to protect the country from others like Holmes.
Mainstream media attacked Natural News and other alternative news sites for simply raising questions about the timing of Holmes’ alleged actions and the erratic nature of his behavior.
In the Natural News piece, the author posits that Holmes’ attack was a false flag, pointing out:
- Holmes could have been hand selected by silent actors to carry out his actions because of his educational involvement in mind-altering neuroscience.
- He was equipped with tactical knowledge and bomb-making expertise and supplies that are difficult to obtain and use correctly. He is alleged to have funded his arsenal in part with the help of a Federal education grant of $26,000, the details of which are sketchy.
- He has no background and information about his past is sparse at best.
Of course, mainstream thinkers lambast anyone who would dare to suggest that such a tragedy would be foisted upon the American public by shady operatives of some clandestine force for political manipulation. This is the United States; our government is a benevolent one with only the best interests of all involved in mind, right?
History tells a different story.
The CIA has a long and well-documented relationship with experimentation in mind control for the purpose of developing the use of unsuspecting people as weapons. From the agency’s creation in 1947 until Congressional scrutiny befell the agency in 1976 with the help of Senator Frank Church, its experiments went unnoticed.
The Church hearings brought to light the agency’s involvement in years of psychological manipulation of test subjects using drugs, hypnosis and barbaric medical procedures. It was discovered that the CIA had developed the ability to control the minds of those it had manipulated using signals, often making them carry out sexual or deviant acts that would otherwise be out of character.
You can read more about some of the CIA mind-control initiatives in declassified documents that have been compiled by a global team of researchers and intelligence experts here.
It is also no secret that Federal agencies stage incidents on a regular basis. In recent years, to perpetuate the threat of terror, the FBI has coerced individuals into going along with outlandish terror plots and provided weapons and supplies to them. It has been estimated that 14 of the 22 major terror attack threats on American soil since 9/11 were actually FBI sting operations.
With such past evidence, it is a danger to cast aside any alternate explanation of Holmes’ actions as too outlandish, fearmongering or conspiracy. And such an easily politicized tragedy should — and would in a responsible society — be vetted for means, motive and opportunity from a variety of perspectives.