Gun control - Gun massacres : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

GUN Massacres

Coincidence or Conspiracy

Extracted from Guns Australia magazine (January/February. 1998)

Author: Jim Dickson

Food for thought

For many years the worlds intelligence forces have know that they can look through psychiatric records, and select patient with strong homicidal and suicidal tendencies, put him under deep drug induced hypnosis and program him to kill and commit suicide on command. These disposable assassins are particularly useful when there is no chance of escape after the hit, or when there must remain no way of connecting the intelligence agency to the murder.

Today, as the world moves inexorably to a one world government under the united nations, the worldwide push to ban guns that might be used to oppose loss of national sovereignty is making spectacular use of these methods.

In his book on guerilla warfare, General Manual Bayo, the man who trained Cuba's Fidel Castro, wrote "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action". The course of recent history has shown countless acts of perfect coordination between sensational murders and anti-gun laws. A small sampling of these includes the following.

For Example

In 1962, when the U.S. senator Tom Dodd's mail order gun ban was fighting for its life in the senate, President John F. Kennedy and a Dallas Texas police officer were killed with mail order guns. The day the Senate Judiciary Committee was to vote on the Dodd bill, civil rights leader Martin Luther King was murdered. Two members who opposed the bill and had been allowed to vote late, switched their votes to support the bill.

Two months later, early on the morning the U.S. House of Representatives was to vote on the bill, Senator Robert Kennedy was assassinated. The bill was passed as " A memorial to Bobby". It is known today as the infamous Gun Control Act of 1968.

These were the precursors that set a precedence for the recent flurry of action. While assault rifles with 30-shot magazines have been common in the U.S. for the past 54 years for the M1 Carbine, and 20-30 years for the AR-15 and AK-47, the use of these in sensational crimes is found almost exclusively in the last 10 years, at the same time the New World Order has firmed up. The reason is simple. These semi-auto versions of current military rifles are the best choice for civilians who don't want to end up on the wrong side of a concentration death camp gate under the New World Order. If you think that sounds extreme, bear in mind that no one would disarm you and leave you defenceless unless they had something planned for you that would that would make you resist with the force of arms if you had them.

In 1984 the push was on to ban armour-piercing pistol bullets and "Uzi's". James Huberty killed 21 people at San Ysidro, California, McDonalds with a shotgun and a semi-auto Uzi loaded with the extremely rare and virtually unobtainable steel core armour-piercing 9mm ammo. The pending armour piercing bullet ban passed. The fact that the massacre would have been impossible in the first place, had the victims been legally allowed to carry concealed weapons, was ignored as politically incorrect.

A few years later Michael Ryan killed 16 people in Hungerford, England, with a semi-auto AK-47. These 16 were defenceless because their government had denied them the right to keep and bear arms, while licensing Michael Ryan with suspicious ease and speed. The result was not allowing people to defend themselves but rather a law banning assault rifles.

In January of 1989 just after the California Attorney General asked police for evidence to support his plan to ban assault weapons, Patrick Purdey shot 36 children in a Stockton, California, schoolyard with a semi-auto AK-47. Five were killed.

When senate scheduled a vote on assault weapons ban in mid-September, Joseph Wesbecker shot 24 people with a semi-auto AK-47 at a Louiville plant on September 14 1989, killing 8. Canada banned the Ruger Mini-14 rifle after Lepine 14 women at a Canadian college with one.

As votes were pending on semi-auto bills in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives in 1990, James Pough, a man with a long criminal record, killed 8 people at a Jacksonville, Florida GMAC office with an M1 carbine.

The day before the U.S. House of Representatives was supposed to scheduled a vote on a bill banning magazines holding more than than 7 shots, Jo Jo Henard used 15 and 17 round capacity pistols to shoot 42 people in Killeen, Texas, killing 21.

The cases continue in the U.S. and abroad, and each one is perfectly timed to enable more anti-gun laws to be passed. This is an obvious plan, and a most successful one. The anti-gun media cries to ban the gun instead of condemning the fact that the victims were unarmed and defenceless. If they had been armed, people may still have been injured or killed, but no massacre would have been possible.


The ban on manufacture of new assault weapons in the U.S. was about to be repealed when suddenly the Government Office building in Oklahoma City was bombed. Instantly, there was a flurry of bills to give total police powers to the Federal Government, while the press made an anti-assault rifle issue out of a bombing ! The push to repeal the assault weapon was postponed.

Interestingly, the building was supposed to have been destroyed by a truck bomb, but retired U.S. Air Force General, who had been in charge of all Air Force conventional weapons, publicly stated that a concrete pillar construction building like the one in Oklahoma, could not have been destroyed by such a truck bomb unless the reinforced concrete pillars had been drilled through and dynamite demolition charges inserted. Since those were on the inside of the building, only the Government's men could have done it. The bomb was supposedly directed at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents in revenge for their massacre of the people at the Waco, Texas the previous year, yet these two agencies all called in sick almost to a man that day. These two agencies were also the ones who would have received dictatorial powers, had the anti-terrorist legislation introduced after the bombing been passed.

The press has also worked with these two agencies to target the militia movement in the U.S. for destruction. The militias were born when men realised the government would one day come after their guns. Those who intended to fight, instead of surrender, looked for like-minded people so they wouldn't have to stand alone. The militias are nothing but people who plan to stand together against the coming government gun grab. Until then they will do nothing. They are composed of people from all races and walks of life, and are no threat to anyone but a would be dictator. The press is now busy labelling every street gang and criminal band in the country a militia, as they cry for more laws against guns.

Look for more shootings and bombings attributed to the politically incorrect and more dictatorial and anti-gun laws passed in the wake of each coming atrocity. In police work you look for a motive for a crime. Who will benefit? If it were people collecting insurance money instead of government forces worldwide getting laws passed and increasing their power those responsible would have been hanged long ago. Governments are above the law though, particularly when aided and abetted by a willing press.

The press puts it's own propaganda spin on each story, training people to think politically correct. Never a word about the government disarming the population and leaving it helpless, thereby making the atrocity possible. It's always ban the gun and be good little slaves to the state.

No one points out that under English Common Law the police have only general duty to protect the whole public, and no responsibility for any specific individual. The American courts have ruled on this repeatedly and rightly so as only a police state could wield sufficient power to be responsible for every individual. Now if the police and government accept no liability for failing to protect you, then who do they think they are to deny you your god given right to protect yourself and your family ? They are playing god with your life and your family's life when they deny you the right to keep and bear arms and prosecute you for defending yourself. This gives them enormous power and power has always been considered an end in itself. The public is soon forced into the plight of defenceless slave supplicating it's master for mercy and protection.

The brainwashing continues with the notion that only those who have government approval have the right to defend themselves and their families. Under most modern anti-gun laws a convicted felon is barred from legal firearm ownership and voting but not paying taxes, despite the fact that the rallying cry of the American revolution of 1776 was, " No taxation without representation ".

A felony was once defined as a capital crime, conviction meant execution. Today it covers bad cheques, fist fights, certain traffic accidents--you name it and it's now a felony. Soon the majority of American citizens may be convicted felons as almost every offence is reclassified as a felony. Then perhaps they will see that the rights and liberties originally given to all free men have become a privilege for the governments favourite few. When a government can license and revoke rights, they are no longer rights, but a privilege. When a government says it's people can't keep and bear arms without government license, then it's equally guilty with the perpetrator of any crime that befalls those it has disarmed. Even more sinister is what awaits the politically incorrect after their disarmament under the coming of the New World Order.....

Please fill free to copy and distribute.

-- dick (, November 23, 1999


It could also simply be that as the anti-gun media selects certain weapons as being fashionably politically incorrect, and gives such weapons wide attention, this acts to inspire nuts to use those particular weapons. The point of the article, I think, is valid, but you don't need this huge conspiracy stuff to make it work.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), November 23, 1999.

Oh yea!!
here's lookin' at ya!

-- spy man (, November 23, 1999.

--the whole point IS the apparent timing "coincidences", I mean, littelton colorado shootings, same city, few days before the national NRA meeting, the SAME day the state of colorado was voting on a gun bill. I mean, REALLY, what's the odds? Also, for what it's worth, I watched it on tv as soon as it happened, there were at least three times initially that students running away were caught and interviewed by the tv guys, and these kids said MORE than two shooters, one batch of kids said two kids and an ADULT, as in THREE people, were there shooting. I saw it, bet a lot of other people dod too, then those clips disappeared. they weren't played again, but saw a heck of a lot of other clips played over and over.

The entire original post is OUTSTANDING, and the conspiracies are real. We have a rogue, shadow government, people and organizations of a criminal nature, that have been around a long time, and they are committing heinous crimes daily. They have co-opted and corrupted large segments of the bureaucracy, the judicial branch, all THROUGH the executive branch, and many members of congress, both houses, both sides. And that's just in government. They are in private business as well, and it's international in scope, and trememdously powerful. "They" have the power to spike stories at the highest levels of the print and broadcast media. Aww, geezzz.... It's REAL. The info is out there, it's available.

zog the looker

-- zog (, November 23, 1999.

Pleeeaaassse! This is really reaching to concoct something. Lets stick to preparation for y2k failure please.

-- JoseMiami (, November 23, 1999.

Mr. Miami, would you follow us please, and don't make any sudden moves---we have a warrant for your arrest---something about some illegal files on your hard drive......

-- TheGMan (noguns4u@all.dork), November 24, 1999.

The Lessons Of History The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. From 1929 to 1953, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Turkey established gun control in 1911. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill people, and other "mongrelized peoples," unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1 million "educated people", unable to defend themselves, were rounded upand exterminated. 56 MILLION DEAD FOR WANT OF A METHOD TO DEFEND THEMSELVES EFFECTIVELY YET THERE ARE THOSE WHO INSIST"IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE"

-- zoobie (, November 25, 1999.


I agree with you about the post, and the "coincidences" it includes. You may remember that, in the 1950s, subliminal advertising was used in movie theaters across the country, and proved to be quite effective. Then, it was relatively harmless: the audiences were "told" to buy refreshments during the intermission, sometimes with an emphasis on one kind of snack over another. Movies have been made about the effectiveness of subliminal messaging; there was even an X-file episode about it.

So, who is to say that those who pioneered the idea didn't refine it, and that our current "morally challenged" administration hasn't decided to take full advantge of it?

No one has ever given me believable justification for the destruction of the remains of the Murrah building so soon after the bombing, along with lots of valuable evidence.


We're not reaching any farther than others better informed than we are have already. Maybe you can offer a believable excuse for the demolition of the Murrah building so quickly. What was he trying to do when he issued the order? Save yellow tape?

-- hunter (way@up.north), November 25, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ