It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jared Loughner and "conscience dreaming" - look a little deeper...

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I posted this in another thread, but thought it might work better as it's own thread instead...
Jared spoke of "Conscience dreaming" which most people think was actually a misspelling of the phrase"concious dreaming" but I have found information that might just prove he was actually meaning conscience and not concious...


"John Rawls in his Theory of Justice defines a Conscientist objector as an individual prepared to undertake, in public (and often despite widespread condemnation), an action of civil disobedience to a legal rule justifying it (also in public) by reference to contrary foundational social virtues (such as justice as liberty or fairness) and the principles of morality and law derived from them.[149] Rawls considered civil disobedience should be viewed as an appeal, warning or admonishment (showing general respect and fidelity to the rule of law by the non-violence and transparency of methods adopted) that a law breaches a community's fundamental virtue of justice."

en.wikipedia.org...

Now look at the first quote from his video titled "Hello":
"my favorite activity is conscience dreaming, the greatest inspiration for my political business information. Some of you don't dream, sadly."

What I take that to mean is that his "dream" is to inspire people to wake up and rise against the government...to start a revolution, if you will. For example: In one quote he is trying to say is that currency is only currency because the government tells us it is and we follow their orders. If we weren't to listen to the government then we could create our own currency and not be at the mercy of the government. I also think this proves that political rhetoric played no part in his actions, as the conscience dreaming was his inspiration for his political business information.
Now, after reading the above definition of "conscience" go back and watch his videos. They all start to make more sense. I think he picked the Giffords gathering because she would be the most easily accessible target that symbolized the government. His REAL target was actually the US Government as a whole.

IMHO this proves that he had intent to kill and injure people KNOWING that it was wrong. In his own warped beliefs he thought he was serving justice...
edit on 13-1-2011 by Piper96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Im glad you found that. I was gonna look into that further too because it did seem weird that he misspelled that and not other things(from what I remember). Not only that but the context of what he spoke about didn't seem to correlate to lucid dreaming so much. Thanks for the info!



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Well I thought it was pretty interesting how everything fell into place and how his ramblings actually started to make some amount of sense once I looked into this. It's actually kinda creepy...



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
i think we are going to find out alot more of this once the Trial starts. i heard today on CNN the U.S. Marshals that have Jared in custody said that he is just sitting in his cell not saying a word.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Are you happy with the state of your Government? Do you think they work for you?



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Ultimately I find it sad that he felt so unable to get his point across that he had to take it to that ultimate act of "civil disobedience." I am under the impression that he felt like the people that didn't understand his way of communicating his thoughts were stupid. I'm curious to know that had he felt understood would he still have committed that horrible act of violence...? Unfortunately we will never know.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
If that is the case and the definition posted matches the definition of his actions, then I only have one this to say:

The kid has more balls than most of the people in this country today. Sadly, his statement was made out of rage and perhaps psychological issues, and not out of tactical thinking.

Maybe next time the target will be something that won't send the country into a blame game panic and actually have relevance towards freeing ourselves from the federal government. Clearly a little heard of Congresswoman would not invoke the reaction that Loughner was expecting under these circumstance.

Thus, if he would have known that, and it was his goal to do as said, it would go against all accounts that he was an "intelligent" person as per his friends and family.

It is still questionable in my mind. A 12 year old could have thought of a better method to instill dissent than this act.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   


Here is a video you might like to watch on this subject.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Ventessa
 


Your embedded video isn't working...
2nd



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I thought he was simply using the wrong term for "lucid dreaming" being a nut and all.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
he went for giffords because he was allowed a question at one of her conferences and he wasted his question saying "what is government if words have no meaning?" now when she didnt asnswer that (how the hell DO you answer that?) he saw it as her defending the government, and because he sees things as absolutes, she became the enemy by personifying the government in his eyes. i dont believe giffords was just in the way and became a target, but was the actual target. he asked for her specifically, and she was the first casualty. he wanted her, rather it was because his question, or was obsessed with her

now on the other hand, he disappeared from his house for a week, has a police record that is now a matter of "national security" and is so known to the police in his area that they are on a first name basis.

the big thing now is going to be "why the hell didnt they do anything when he was threatening her in letters?" he was pulled over by police hours before the shooting, but got let go. now why didnt they notice when he started threatening his neighbors, and classmates. guess telling everyone that you are going to kill people for months doesnt mean they are actually going to kill someone right?

giffords got the threat letter way before the incident, so shouldv'e had time to prepare. he was completely dissassociated from reality, and was probably hoping for suicide by cop/ concealed carrier

you are thinking too far into it, i think

what you should be thinking into is "why is obama capitalizing on this tradgedy like bill clinton after oaklahoma?" i mean from the first day of the shooting he began to use this for approval ratings. 14k shirts in two days is near impossible to do unless he had them made ahead of time or began production within an hour of hearing of the shooter

i think they knew it was going to happen, and let it. we will see in the coming months



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching

what you should be thinking into is "why is obama capitalizing on this tradgedy like bill clinton after oaklahoma?" i mean from the first day of the shooting he began to use this for approval ratings. 14k shirts in two days is near impossible to do unless he had them made ahead of time or began production within an hour of hearing of the shooter

i think they knew it was going to happen, and let it. we will see in the coming months


I thought the same thing...
nation.foxnews.com...
FoxNation.com spoke to representatives at University of Arizona BookStores who revealed the vendor they used...."Youth Monument," a Los Angeles-based company specializing in "the hottest" college brands. "I don't feel comfortable commenting on the story," said Nick Ventura when contacted by FoxNation.com. Ventura called himself "a partner" at Youth Movement. When asked if the University of Arizona was a regular client and if there was any contact with the White House or any political group he responded "no comment."



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
i kind of get what hes saying by how do you explain goverment if words have no meaning. its just a force of controll maybe just a feeling

its like of the book 1984 when they write in newspeak and want to change the dictonary so that theres limited words so people cant express there self how can u revolt when its not a word?

think about it when people give you a definition of a word they are using other made up words to explain it. its all a intricate system that controll your thought but in essence all it is, is a word to describe electrical impulses. and i explain the goverment as a negative force if you controll grammer you controll the way a person expresses his mind its quite rigid its like when you try to define a word but you cant but you no what it means just a feeling




top topics



 
2

log in

join