I see this particular line of thinking as mostly motivated by a desire to make our mental health system look bad (which it definitely is). I doubt it gets to the core understandings behind these incidents.
All these very public incidents are portrayed (by - the story tellers?) as done by lone kooks. That they were all kooks to some degree is probably correct. But a LOT of people are kooky and never end up doing something like this. There is another dimension to many of these incidents, and a few of them have been researched enough that we know without a doubt that there was more involved.
Oswald, though a bit kooky himself, was set up to be JFK's killer but was unlikely to be one who fired the shot or shots that hit Kennedy. Likewise, the guy accused of the MLK shooting was probably not even the person who shot the bullets. On top of that attorney Bill Pepper found some evidence that King was actually killed by a doctor at the hospital he was taken to. Sirhan Sirhan has always maintained his innocence in the RFK shooting, though he was there and had a gun. There is some evidence in several other shootings that the "lone kooks" did not in fact act alone.
Because the "official stories" in all these cases have never been fully resolved, I think it is safe to assume that this official story is incomplete.
We know that practices exist that enable a person to be secretly controlled by others who remain undetected. Most are based on more or less aggressive forms of hypnosis. Others may rely more on drugs, implants, or "psychotronic" technologies. I don't know that any of these methods have been fully connected to a real world incident. But there are many stories floating around that this is the case.
The basic procedure, then, for a planned shooting would be roughly as follows:
1) Some power group decides that an incident is needed to forward their agenda.
2) The incident is planned, and the order goes out to locate someone who can be blamed for the incident.
3) Operatives locate one or more likely "patsies" and arrange for them to have some sort of secret influence installed in them. "Kooky" people are sought out, as the cover story will be stronger. Friendly psychiatrists may be used to help locate such persons.
4) The secret control technology is installed (with psychiatric help?) and the incident is planned and carried out. If possible, the patsy is killed so he can't talk or be "un-hypnotized."
5) The cover story is released to news outlets.
6) "Alternative media" tries to dig out the truth, but various propaganda techniques are used to "debunk" their efforts. This has sometimes resulted in the death of one or more journalists or witnesses involved with the investigation.
Some analysts - perhaps in an overabundance of enthusiasm - assume that all such incidents follow this pattern. I doubt this is true, and has resulted in some very poor results - as those surrounding the Sandy Hook incident. I don't know that any incident has been totally pinned down as following this pattern. Maybe the MLK shooting comes the closest. We should get to the bottom of this. It definitely plays a role in the larger subject of ponerology.
I'd agree with what you are saying - look at the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 in Hobart, Tasmania. Martin Bryant fits the profile (somewhat) as Harrison describes, but many multiple head shots, hardly any misses, from multiple directions, from a kid who doesn't know how to handle a rifle??? Expert marksmen couldn't explain how he did it. He was a patsy. Emergency response comes in with almost supernatural expediency - was a set up. Subsequently Australia was disarmed.
Some good examples from you two. The question in my mind is: is there something about this "type" that makes them particularly susceptible to the types of influences and/or programming that such patsies are subjected to?
We are talking about people with autistic traits - diminished left/right hemisphere activity, 'isolated' regions of the brain that are more highly developed yet lack sufficient integration with other major neural pathways. There's probably something about this particular atypical neural architecture that offers unique opportunities to employ these people as patsies. Broad social awareness is dull and often misunderstood, but once a concept is grasped it's pursued with vigor (often a left hemisphere crusade that doesn't get the message from the right that there's serious negative social implications). Without the checks and balances of good hemispheric integration could these people be more easily set on a path (like becoming a shooter) with little consideration of consequences and only focused on the task (a distinctly left hemisphere trait, believing it's always right, even if that pesky right hemisphere is screaming that things are not OK - the left hemisphere thinks the right hemisphere is a conspiracy theorist lol)?
I'm just thinking out loud here - I'd have to do a deep dive into the literature to vet the concept. And is this atypical neural architecture more prone to suggestibility? Possibly - I really don't know (although I'm sure there are studies out there to verify or not).
There's also the type that wants notoriety and/or money, also the suicide by cop variety. Some don't realize it's a suicide mission. Others do. At 20, reasoning skills aren't fully developed.
Good question. I am not aware of any direct data from Hubbard on suggestibility.
His general observations were somewhat along the lines of "most people are already in a hypnotic state."
His major parameter used for personality analysis is Tone Level. The higher your tone level, the more "awake" you are, and presumably more resistant to external influences.
On his Chart of Human Evaluation, he does have Column 17 - Hypnotic Level. This is from work he did in 1951 and earlier. At "Tone 4.0" one is "impossible to hypnotize without drugs." Below those levels, one becomes more susceptible to hypnosis.
At higher tones, the person may refuse to follow a hypnotic command ("negate") or deny that he was ever hypnotized. At tone 1.1 (just above total Fear) the person is "In a permanent light trance, but negates."
Below this level (Grief, Apathy, Deep Apathy) the subject is "very hypnotic." At the lowest level, "equivalent to a hypnotized subject when awake." These levels are roughly equivalent to chronic depression or anxiety. The lowest is roughly equivalent to catatonia. You would not expect an active shooter to exist at that level. However, at grief or apathy it is quite possible.
Hubbard used hypnotism in his earliest research but refused to teach his students to do it, as he considered it too dangerous.
It is impossible to judge to what extent such techniques are used in these shooting cases. When the shooter is killed during the incident, he cannot be interviewed. And even if he (usually a man) is interviewed, it is likely that the interviewer is not adept enough to check for prior hypnotism on the case, or many even be colluding with the actual perpetrators.
In this society, where most of our telepathic abilities are totally dead, it is very difficult to be aware of what is really going on "over there." We can keep secrets rather easily and in fact make a game of it. Most of our dramatic entertainment is based on keeping and breaking secrets. In a telepathic society, such games would be nearly impossible. In our society this lack of ability allows for inordinate amounts of deception.
It's always possible this guy actually acted alone. But the case has some gaping holes in it. Have alternative journalists come up with any firm evidence about any of it?
There's many hours, and books, of compelling evidence that this would more likely be some sort of black ops than a kid acting alone. To be honest it's been years since I did a deep dive into it all, but there's good balistic evidence that there were 2 shooters from different vantage points who were highly skilled in their craft (if you can call it a craft). When I say 'evidence', anything official has been buried, but some have gleaned their own data from photos, video, first hand reports, and physically looking at the location, putting together time-lines, etc.
It's our version of the JFK assassination in terms of intrigue and things just not adding up.
Agree with you. Remember The Day of the Jackal? There are people who are professional assassins as we all know. We often hear about political hitmen. South Africa is full of them. The mafia were famous for it.
This bloke who tried to assassinate Trump was no professional, I suspect he was promised a lot of money and that he would be helped to escape. It was planned and a Kooky bloke was the fall guy. Maybe he was caught doing something he was ashamed of and blackmailed. Who knows? He was shot so he couldn't talk ic my opinion.
'Subsequently Australia was disarmed.' Absolutely correct.
This is the typical response for Marxist type personalities. We see it everywhere where despots or tyrants are given power. We see it now where the socialist Lula da Silva was installed.
They know that they will be shot for what they are planning.
Anyone else consider that these shooters are some how "programmed" to do what they do?
I've been wondering why SSRI's would create the notion in their heads they should shoot people, perhaps media coverage of previous shootings plus SSRI's is the programming method there.
Take the Aurora theater shooter, he was seeing a shrink Lynne Fenton:
The creation of a mind-programmed assassin was one of the main objectives of MKULTRA. They deny having achieved this goal, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was a lie.
They seem like clumsy tools, maybe this is why they generally target children or others incapable of defending themselves rather than an actual hard target (politician, etc)
Pharmacology is worth investigating. See the Germanwings 9525 crash. Mirtazapine / Remeron is an "instant psychopath" pill.
Other data: Both parents were therapists. Dad owned around ten ARs. Son had practiced one the range since the days of his humiliation on the school shooting team.
As for the "instant psychopath", I would nitpick that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here are some known side effects:
"mood or behavior changes, anxiety, panic attacks, trouble sleeping, or if you feel impulsive, irritable, agitated, hostile, aggressive, restless, hyperactive (mentally or physically), more depressed, or have thoughts about suicide or hurting yourself"
Aside from hostility and aggression, none of the rest are psychopathic. (And psychopaths aren't the only creatures who manifest hostility and aggression.)
I've actually taken it and I can assure you it turns you into a psychopath. Very quickly. This is what the Germanwings copilot was taking (and 4 other drugs).
I had some of the others but they were very minor compared to the loss of empathy which was profound and dramatic and noticed by everyone around me. I noticed it last. When I noticed it I immediately discontinue the drug despite the withdrawal risks. On that drug I certainly would have flown a plane full of passengers into a cliff without any emotional affect whatsoever. I would have been slightly bored by it.
I'll comment on the drug. Complete loss of empathy for anyone including loved ones including myself. Moving from observed facts to speculation, I would speculate this is the therapeutic mechanism of this drug (which of course is not known to its manufacturers). I.e. it eliminates the symptoms (negative affect) by eliminating empathy for self or others.
Yikes... "Mirtazapine came into medical use in the United States in 1996.[11] The patent expired in 2004, and generic versions are available.[11][17] In 2021, it was the 124th most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with more than four million prescriptions.[18][19]"
I can say a co worker started on Effexor and began to behave strangely, as though he thought there were no repercussions for what he said or did, not "instant psychopath" but he clearly had no worries about telling the boss he was fat, and some other odd things like putting a CD into the break room microwave and turning it on for several minutes (don't do this).
He seemed normal to me prior to starting on that drug.
This hits the nail on the head. There are too many people who consider themselves a natural elite, when in fact they'd have to struggle just to reach Average.
People were warning police about this guy climbing the building. Nothing happened.
The guy got on the roof and was able to get off a few shots.
Somehow one bullet basically grazed Trump but somehow his ear was not cut....
But the biggest thing that set off my bs detector was when Trump and the secret service stood up for a photo op. If they followed protocol, Trump would have been covered by the SS on the floor for a while until there was the all clear as they didn't know if there was another shooter. Unless they already knew....
Sometimes politics becomes like pro wrestling, where it's acting while looking real.
The latest attempt also didn't make sense.... They claim Iran had a part in it, but how exactly did Iran know that Trump was going there, which was not publicized?
Fear, uncertainty, doubt.... Keep the marks believing the narrative!
That is the official definition of a mass shooter but it's a really functionally useless definition. He was a shooter. Categorising him as "mass" doesn't help anything. And I would say it's incorrect because I doubt he intentionally shot anyone except Trump. Not even in the "they were in my way" sense. That is a very different psychology to the person who wants to kill as many as he can, or has a long enemies list, or hates a whole class of people.
Much more likely that there were two or more shooters.
If the Deep State wanted Trump whacked, they're spoiled for choice viz. professional snipers, so why risk using an amateur?
Traditional assassination playbook: MK Ultra'ed Patsy + 1 or more professional shooters. Also, some are questioning whether the guy on roof was actually Crooks.
The roof scenario seems like classic Patsy theatre to me. "Oh I'll just sling my rifle over my shoulder & climb up this handy ladder in front of everyone in the era of the iPhone and stumble around on the roof like a bowery drunk".
At this stage it's perfectly reasonable to speculate over whether 'Crooks' or Yearick or whoever it was on the roof actually got to shoot anyone.
I'm open to the possibility of more than 1 shooter. Doesn't change the fact that Crooks was on the roof, was seen on the roof shooting, and seems to have the typical mass shooter/patsy psychological profile.
"If the Deep State wanted Trump whacked, they're spoiled for choice viz. professional snipers, so why risk using an amateur?"
I find your logic wanting. Fact is, Trump *wasn't* whacked. You'd think with at least 1 or more additional "professional" shooters he would be, no?
According to this classmate, in 2016 Crooks expressed negative views about all the politicians running for President, though he had particularly negative views about Trump and was contemptuous of the classmate, who expressed support of Trump.
….or is it bullshit by the media following the CIA/FBI narrative?
See my latest post series.
2 shooters, Yearick on the roof was older, Antifa, Ukraine military volunteer and Brave AI reported him as the shooter and weapon as Remington 700.
Crooks was probably shot at the water cooler and may have let off the shot that killed someone in the bleachers. John Cullen has been reporting on the second shooter / witness testimony story.
I see this particular line of thinking as mostly motivated by a desire to make our mental health system look bad (which it definitely is). I doubt it gets to the core understandings behind these incidents.
All these very public incidents are portrayed (by - the story tellers?) as done by lone kooks. That they were all kooks to some degree is probably correct. But a LOT of people are kooky and never end up doing something like this. There is another dimension to many of these incidents, and a few of them have been researched enough that we know without a doubt that there was more involved.
Oswald, though a bit kooky himself, was set up to be JFK's killer but was unlikely to be one who fired the shot or shots that hit Kennedy. Likewise, the guy accused of the MLK shooting was probably not even the person who shot the bullets. On top of that attorney Bill Pepper found some evidence that King was actually killed by a doctor at the hospital he was taken to. Sirhan Sirhan has always maintained his innocence in the RFK shooting, though he was there and had a gun. There is some evidence in several other shootings that the "lone kooks" did not in fact act alone.
Because the "official stories" in all these cases have never been fully resolved, I think it is safe to assume that this official story is incomplete.
We know that practices exist that enable a person to be secretly controlled by others who remain undetected. Most are based on more or less aggressive forms of hypnosis. Others may rely more on drugs, implants, or "psychotronic" technologies. I don't know that any of these methods have been fully connected to a real world incident. But there are many stories floating around that this is the case.
The basic procedure, then, for a planned shooting would be roughly as follows:
1) Some power group decides that an incident is needed to forward their agenda.
2) The incident is planned, and the order goes out to locate someone who can be blamed for the incident.
3) Operatives locate one or more likely "patsies" and arrange for them to have some sort of secret influence installed in them. "Kooky" people are sought out, as the cover story will be stronger. Friendly psychiatrists may be used to help locate such persons.
4) The secret control technology is installed (with psychiatric help?) and the incident is planned and carried out. If possible, the patsy is killed so he can't talk or be "un-hypnotized."
5) The cover story is released to news outlets.
6) "Alternative media" tries to dig out the truth, but various propaganda techniques are used to "debunk" their efforts. This has sometimes resulted in the death of one or more journalists or witnesses involved with the investigation.
Some analysts - perhaps in an overabundance of enthusiasm - assume that all such incidents follow this pattern. I doubt this is true, and has resulted in some very poor results - as those surrounding the Sandy Hook incident. I don't know that any incident has been totally pinned down as following this pattern. Maybe the MLK shooting comes the closest. We should get to the bottom of this. It definitely plays a role in the larger subject of ponerology.
I'd agree with what you are saying - look at the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 in Hobart, Tasmania. Martin Bryant fits the profile (somewhat) as Harrison describes, but many multiple head shots, hardly any misses, from multiple directions, from a kid who doesn't know how to handle a rifle??? Expert marksmen couldn't explain how he did it. He was a patsy. Emergency response comes in with almost supernatural expediency - was a set up. Subsequently Australia was disarmed.
Some good examples from you two. The question in my mind is: is there something about this "type" that makes them particularly susceptible to the types of influences and/or programming that such patsies are subjected to?
We are talking about people with autistic traits - diminished left/right hemisphere activity, 'isolated' regions of the brain that are more highly developed yet lack sufficient integration with other major neural pathways. There's probably something about this particular atypical neural architecture that offers unique opportunities to employ these people as patsies. Broad social awareness is dull and often misunderstood, but once a concept is grasped it's pursued with vigor (often a left hemisphere crusade that doesn't get the message from the right that there's serious negative social implications). Without the checks and balances of good hemispheric integration could these people be more easily set on a path (like becoming a shooter) with little consideration of consequences and only focused on the task (a distinctly left hemisphere trait, believing it's always right, even if that pesky right hemisphere is screaming that things are not OK - the left hemisphere thinks the right hemisphere is a conspiracy theorist lol)?
I'm just thinking out loud here - I'd have to do a deep dive into the literature to vet the concept. And is this atypical neural architecture more prone to suggestibility? Possibly - I really don't know (although I'm sure there are studies out there to verify or not).
There's also the type that wants notoriety and/or money, also the suicide by cop variety. Some don't realize it's a suicide mission. Others do. At 20, reasoning skills aren't fully developed.
Good question. I am not aware of any direct data from Hubbard on suggestibility.
His general observations were somewhat along the lines of "most people are already in a hypnotic state."
His major parameter used for personality analysis is Tone Level. The higher your tone level, the more "awake" you are, and presumably more resistant to external influences.
On his Chart of Human Evaluation, he does have Column 17 - Hypnotic Level. This is from work he did in 1951 and earlier. At "Tone 4.0" one is "impossible to hypnotize without drugs." Below those levels, one becomes more susceptible to hypnosis.
At higher tones, the person may refuse to follow a hypnotic command ("negate") or deny that he was ever hypnotized. At tone 1.1 (just above total Fear) the person is "In a permanent light trance, but negates."
Below this level (Grief, Apathy, Deep Apathy) the subject is "very hypnotic." At the lowest level, "equivalent to a hypnotized subject when awake." These levels are roughly equivalent to chronic depression or anxiety. The lowest is roughly equivalent to catatonia. You would not expect an active shooter to exist at that level. However, at grief or apathy it is quite possible.
Hubbard used hypnotism in his earliest research but refused to teach his students to do it, as he considered it too dangerous.
It is impossible to judge to what extent such techniques are used in these shooting cases. When the shooter is killed during the incident, he cannot be interviewed. And even if he (usually a man) is interviewed, it is likely that the interviewer is not adept enough to check for prior hypnotism on the case, or many even be colluding with the actual perpetrators.
In this society, where most of our telepathic abilities are totally dead, it is very difficult to be aware of what is really going on "over there." We can keep secrets rather easily and in fact make a game of it. Most of our dramatic entertainment is based on keeping and breaking secrets. In a telepathic society, such games would be nearly impossible. In our society this lack of ability allows for inordinate amounts of deception.
Wow, what a story! I was totally unaware of it, as is common in the U.S. for events that happen in other countries.
I've just jotted down a bit of a note about it here https://escapingmasspsychosis.substack.com/p/on-patsies-and-conspiracies - no details, as you can gather that from some great investigative journalism that's been done over the past 20 something years.
It's always possible this guy actually acted alone. But the case has some gaping holes in it. Have alternative journalists come up with any firm evidence about any of it?
There's many hours, and books, of compelling evidence that this would more likely be some sort of black ops than a kid acting alone. To be honest it's been years since I did a deep dive into it all, but there's good balistic evidence that there were 2 shooters from different vantage points who were highly skilled in their craft (if you can call it a craft). When I say 'evidence', anything official has been buried, but some have gleaned their own data from photos, video, first hand reports, and physically looking at the location, putting together time-lines, etc.
It's our version of the JFK assassination in terms of intrigue and things just not adding up.
Agree with you. Remember The Day of the Jackal? There are people who are professional assassins as we all know. We often hear about political hitmen. South Africa is full of them. The mafia were famous for it.
This bloke who tried to assassinate Trump was no professional, I suspect he was promised a lot of money and that he would be helped to escape. It was planned and a Kooky bloke was the fall guy. Maybe he was caught doing something he was ashamed of and blackmailed. Who knows? He was shot so he couldn't talk ic my opinion.
'Subsequently Australia was disarmed.' Absolutely correct.
This is the typical response for Marxist type personalities. We see it everywhere where despots or tyrants are given power. We see it now where the socialist Lula da Silva was installed.
They know that they will be shot for what they are planning.
Reading up on Bryant "IQ of 66" but found competent to stand trial, that's Australia for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant
RFKjr doesn't think it was Sirhan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Robert_F._Kennedy#Second_gunman_hypothesis
Thane Eugene Cesar
Good on pointing that out. I thought that was his position on it.
I think the operative characteristic is being easily manipulated by FBI/CIA types. They're patsies.
Anyone else consider that these shooters are some how "programmed" to do what they do?
I've been wondering why SSRI's would create the notion in their heads they should shoot people, perhaps media coverage of previous shootings plus SSRI's is the programming method there.
Take the Aurora theater shooter, he was seeing a shrink Lynne Fenton:
Photo: https://tinyurl.com/mr2ta87h
Website: https://www.lynnefenton.com/ (the owl certainly is interesting)
Was he programmed to do what he did? Is media coverage of an event enough to program a person into doing these things?
Did his shrink program him?
This Trump shooter fits the profile of "bullied, loner, outcast", at least that's what people are saying.
Why would this 20 year old kid take a shot at Trump, and why was he even able to?
The fact he was able to get on the roof and take several shots implied someone wanted this to happen, but how did they get him to do it?
I can't prove it, but it feels to me like there is some method of programming these people, then triggering them to act out.
The creation of a mind-programmed assassin was one of the main objectives of MKULTRA. They deny having achieved this goal, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was a lie.
They seem like clumsy tools, maybe this is why they generally target children or others incapable of defending themselves rather than an actual hard target (politician, etc)
Pharmacology is worth investigating. See the Germanwings 9525 crash. Mirtazapine / Remeron is an "instant psychopath" pill.
Other data: Both parents were therapists. Dad owned around ten ARs. Son had practiced one the range since the days of his humiliation on the school shooting team.
Thanks for the other data - interesting.
As for the "instant psychopath", I would nitpick that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here are some known side effects:
"mood or behavior changes, anxiety, panic attacks, trouble sleeping, or if you feel impulsive, irritable, agitated, hostile, aggressive, restless, hyperactive (mentally or physically), more depressed, or have thoughts about suicide or hurting yourself"
Aside from hostility and aggression, none of the rest are psychopathic. (And psychopaths aren't the only creatures who manifest hostility and aggression.)
Akathisia is the side effect that can drive one to committ homocide.
I've actually taken it and I can assure you it turns you into a psychopath. Very quickly. This is what the Germanwings copilot was taking (and 4 other drugs).
Could you let me know in detail what "turning into a psychopath" means to you? And did you experience any of those other side effects?
I had some of the others but they were very minor compared to the loss of empathy which was profound and dramatic and noticed by everyone around me. I noticed it last. When I noticed it I immediately discontinue the drug despite the withdrawal risks. On that drug I certainly would have flown a plane full of passengers into a cliff without any emotional affect whatsoever. I would have been slightly bored by it.
I'll comment on the drug. Complete loss of empathy for anyone including loved ones including myself. Moving from observed facts to speculation, I would speculate this is the therapeutic mechanism of this drug (which of course is not known to its manufacturers). I.e. it eliminates the symptoms (negative affect) by eliminating empathy for self or others.
Wow, yes, that now makes sense to me! Glad you got off that drug.
Yikes... "Mirtazapine came into medical use in the United States in 1996.[11] The patent expired in 2004, and generic versions are available.[11][17] In 2021, it was the 124th most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with more than four million prescriptions.[18][19]"
I can say a co worker started on Effexor and began to behave strangely, as though he thought there were no repercussions for what he said or did, not "instant psychopath" but he clearly had no worries about telling the boss he was fat, and some other odd things like putting a CD into the break room microwave and turning it on for several minutes (don't do this).
He seemed normal to me prior to starting on that drug.
That rings eerily true as a description.
"overproduction of elites"
This hits the nail on the head. There are too many people who consider themselves a natural elite, when in fact they'd have to struggle just to reach Average.
Everything about this event screams bullshit.
People were warning police about this guy climbing the building. Nothing happened.
The guy got on the roof and was able to get off a few shots.
Somehow one bullet basically grazed Trump but somehow his ear was not cut....
But the biggest thing that set off my bs detector was when Trump and the secret service stood up for a photo op. If they followed protocol, Trump would have been covered by the SS on the floor for a while until there was the all clear as they didn't know if there was another shooter. Unless they already knew....
Sometimes politics becomes like pro wrestling, where it's acting while looking real.
The latest attempt also didn't make sense.... They claim Iran had a part in it, but how exactly did Iran know that Trump was going there, which was not publicized?
Fear, uncertainty, doubt.... Keep the marks believing the narrative!
The main characteristic is having a parent who is a therapist.
I've noticed this a few times too. Any stats?
Crooks wasn't a mass shooter + Good idea to wait for air to clear to find out whether Crooks was the actual "lone gunman on the roof".
He killed or injured 4 people by firing a firearm into a crowd, before he was killed by a sniper. That's a mass shooter.
That is the official definition of a mass shooter but it's a really functionally useless definition. He was a shooter. Categorising him as "mass" doesn't help anything. And I would say it's incorrect because I doubt he intentionally shot anyone except Trump. Not even in the "they were in my way" sense. That is a very different psychology to the person who wants to kill as many as he can, or has a long enemies list, or hates a whole class of people.
Fair enough.
"That is a very different psychology to the person who wants to kill as many as he can, or has a long enemies list, or hates a whole class of people."
Very different motivation, same schizo-autist personality.
Much more likely that there were two or more shooters.
If the Deep State wanted Trump whacked, they're spoiled for choice viz. professional snipers, so why risk using an amateur?
Traditional assassination playbook: MK Ultra'ed Patsy + 1 or more professional shooters. Also, some are questioning whether the guy on roof was actually Crooks.
The roof scenario seems like classic Patsy theatre to me. "Oh I'll just sling my rifle over my shoulder & climb up this handy ladder in front of everyone in the era of the iPhone and stumble around on the roof like a bowery drunk".
At this stage it's perfectly reasonable to speculate over whether 'Crooks' or Yearick or whoever it was on the roof actually got to shoot anyone.
Your piece is a bit premature, H.
I'm open to the possibility of more than 1 shooter. Doesn't change the fact that Crooks was on the roof, was seen on the roof shooting, and seems to have the typical mass shooter/patsy psychological profile.
"If the Deep State wanted Trump whacked, they're spoiled for choice viz. professional snipers, so why risk using an amateur?"
I find your logic wanting. Fact is, Trump *wasn't* whacked. You'd think with at least 1 or more additional "professional" shooters he would be, no?
BTW, it wasn't Yearick, it was Crooks.
Been holding my breath a lo-o-o-o-o-ng time now. Still no sign of Crooks, Harrison.
What are you talking about? Still no sign of Yearick.
Indeed. Also, "Body was cremated before a second, ind. examination could be conducted." Well-colour-me-ay-mazed.
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Let the dust settle and the air clear before doubling down best, H.
Then why is Trump still alive?
One classmate gave an interesting account of Crooks, disputing the characterizations that he had been intensively bullied ( https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-classmate-recalls-trump-shooter-grilling-him-over-support-former-potus-did-not-like-politicians ) or that he had no friends (though his social circle was known for its hostility towards others, including threats of school shootings).
According to this classmate, in 2016 Crooks expressed negative views about all the politicians running for President, though he had particularly negative views about Trump and was contemptuous of the classmate, who expressed support of Trump.
….or is it bullshit by the media following the CIA/FBI narrative?
See my latest post series.
2 shooters, Yearick on the roof was older, Antifa, Ukraine military volunteer and Brave AI reported him as the shooter and weapon as Remington 700.
Crooks was probably shot at the water cooler and may have let off the shot that killed someone in the bleachers. John Cullen has been reporting on the second shooter / witness testimony story.
https://www.malone.news/cp/146705211
The zip code of Butler, Pa is 16001. The occultists love the number 911.