Program anchor Jim Axelrod (live in Newtown, CT): “You’re also learning more about the guns used in the shooting, that belonged to Lanza’s mother?”
Senior Correspondent John Miller sets us up for the punch line: “It’s about the process. She had to go to an awful lot of trouble to get these guns. CT has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. That meant going down to the state police, filling out the forms, getting finger printed, and then waiting to hear back that she was approved for a handgun permit. Then it meant going down to the store and getting an FBI background check, waiting for another period and picking those weapons up. So it’s not one of those things where you just show up with your driver’s license and make a purchase. She made an affirmative effort to get these weapons and as we learned from the landscaper, enjoyed shooting.”
Ready? Here is John Miller’s punch line: “We spoke to another relative who also said she was worried about the defense of her home if there was a collapse of the economy [on screen – close up casual photo of Mrs. Lanza]. She wanted to have weapons on hand to defend them which of course only underscores the irony that those were the guns used by her own child to kill her and so many others.”
And there we are. The circle is complete. Now the gun grabbers can really take off and run with this. “The doomsday preppers are responsible for the murders of 20 children! That’s where this whole thing is coming from! Get their guns!”
You don’t have to be a genius to figure out where this is going!
But then there is THIS. The SGT Report cites a “coincidence” that will leave you thinking about a planned scenario at Newtown, just the kind of operation secret societies are reputedly famous for.
In The Hunger Games, many times called a model of predictive programming, the ritual sacrifice of 23 children is carried out. Twelve districts, two children from each district; they fight in pairs and kill each other until one winner is left. 23 children are killed.
In Newton, Adam Lanza killed 20 children.
The author of The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins, is listed by Wikipedia as one of the famous people who lives in Newtown.
You take it from there. Call it whatever you want to. I try to avoid winging big stretches, but this is too stunning to omit. WTF.
…Meanwhile, the police in Newtown are lying. Here is how that plays out.
We are entering another familiar phase of the standard mass-murder scenario.
It goes like this: “A portrait is beginning to emerge of the killer…”
With Adam Lanza, it starts with “loner, shy, awkward, different, very smart.” It now proceeds to “goth, computer nerd, carried briefcase not backpack, played video games.”
The latter terms are meant to connect the audience, the public, to the 1999 Columbine School mass murders, the touchstone of school shootings, the gold standard. The so-called “trenchcoat mafia”; Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the “goth shooters.”
Next, we may hear Adam Lanza was bullied.
These are all synthetic descriptions about Lanza, manufactured to cue the audience to make certain assumptions about a person they don’t know at all.
The “emerging portrait” is a necessary step in the media presentation. It assures the public that they can make at least partial sense out of the killer.
It’s also a false trail, if in fact the killer was on psychiatric meds, because then all bets are off. The drugs (Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Ritalin, Adderall, etc.) do things to the brain that result in actions entirely beyond any description of Lanza, even when that description comes from family and friends.
Now, the police are getting into the act.
Connecticut State Police Lieutenant, Paul Vance, dangled a carrot in front of the press today: “Our investigators at the crime scene…did produce some very good evidence in this investigation, that our investigators will be able to use in, hopefully, painting the complete picture as to how—and more importantly why—this occurred.”
A note from Adam Lanza, found at the scene? A recording of a confession? Vance didn’t say. Perhaps his punch line will come tomorrow.
Here’s why this is a lie.
Killing your own mother, and then breaking into a school and killing 26 people, most of whom are very young children, doesn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, resolve by assigning a motive.
There is no motive that can explain such a crime.
Lanza was bullied, so he killed 26 people, including little children?
He had a very bad experience when he was in school?
His mother was brutal toward him?
But the media and law-enforcement presentation requires some sort of motive. It’s part of the planned sequence of events that occurs in the aftermath of mass murders. It needs to be there. The public is supposed to digest this motive and either accept it or grudgingly acknowledge it might have played a role in the killings. It’s better than a vacuum.
The public is not supposed to be left with a vacuum.
Of course, the television anchors button the whole thing up with their somber, high-minded, and world-weary bottom-line reminders that “we may never understand what really happened here on the morning of December 14th.” That’s folded in to provide the “helpless factor” that’s now engraved on every mass murder.
“We’re all victims and we have to accept what cannot be explained.”
We’re talking about multiple vectors of explaining a killer. Planned vectors.
“Well, he was this way and he was that way, and so-and-so person said he was this way, and at the end of the day all this helps but there is still an underlying mystery about the human mind that researchers are only beginning to probe, and here is Dr. Such and Such, who has been researching the deep corridors and channels of the brain for thirty years at Harvard, to try to help us make some sense of out of all of this…Doctor?”
Meanwhile, if Adam Lanza was on psychiatric drugs, the answer is obvious. HE HAD NO MOTIVE FOR KILLING ALL THOSE PEOPLE.
There was no motive.
That’s what the drugs do.
Yes, a person might be angry, might be resentful, might feel put-upon, might fantasize about revenge, might wish that people were dead…but he would never act on those feelings and thoughts.
That’s the whole point.
And then he takes the drugs, or dangerously withdraws from them from them, and THEN he kills people.
He does what he would otherwise never do.
In fact, some people who feel absolutely no desire for revenge, after taking the drugs kill others or themselves or both.
Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about the case of Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”
The police came within a few minutes, “five of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso.”
Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”
Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.
Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”
Keep in mind that a person doesn’t have to be severely “down” to be given one of these antidepressants. He or she could just be going through a temporary disappointment, but upon recommendation, a visit to a psychiatrist is made…and then life takes a radically different and extremely dangerous pharmaceutical course.