Originally posted by delusion

Originally posted by triune


My first question this tragedy and all similar mass murders is, what part did prescription medication play in this person going beserk.

This will be a closely guarded peice of information. We cant have people knowing that 'medicine' can turn a person into a maniacal killer.

I honestly think that's as important a debate to have as the one on guns; and I wonder if any who bring it up in public will be shut down?
The danger is that if you are on the same drugs that he was, then people will suspect you of being a potential risk.

These drugs could probably be eliminated (slowly) from people's systems without that much loss to our society except to the companies' stock value; nutrition and exercise and life interests and hobbies would be much better substiitutes. If only these were 'pushed' as much as the drug 'solutions' are.
They only cover up the wound, they don't stop it from festering underneath the shiny bandaid.

edit on 16-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)

Do you know much about pharmacology? I don't really, but I do know some people need drugs, and nutrition/excercise etc. is not going to do anything.

ignore - wrong thread

Originally posted by salainen

Do you know much about pharmacology? I don't really, but I do know some people need drugs, and nutrition/excercise etc. is not going to do anything.

Fair enough, I wasn't trying to make a blanket statement for all cases, but these things really do effect chemicals in the body. And just having a reason to feel better about life through activities and community can't be a bad thing.

Seratonin uptake suppresors have been linked to some very disturbing side effects, I don't know if there's ever been hearings into it but there should be. And as far as a conspiracy goes, companies trying to suppress or downplay knowledge of side effects is definitely one of the more believable ones.
Maybe the drugs have been improved since then and they understand why it was causing problems?

I wouldn't try to be black and white about the issue, there are problems if these things are demonised without proper research and they do help some people, but drugs are pushed prematurely as a solution for sure when it's not always necessary.
How that relates to this case though is unclear but it should be explored.

Originally posted by salainen

Originally posted by Tecumte
Beautiful, very succinct, I whole heartedly agree, like a scripted Hollywood production, not just this one shooting (which COULD, maybe??? have been 'radom' ---though I still have reservations) but a string with the same type MOs, and not just here in the states but as I pointed out several times Canada and Great Britian and Australia, etc. over and over and over, usuallly masked, in the shadows, lights out, smoke bombs, emotionally and mentally ill (alleged) shooters, I really smell a NWO rat, one that would stop at nothing to further humanity into that Brave New (gunless, microchipped, 24/7 surveilled, greatly population reduced, collective) World.

I find it far more believable that someone with severe mental illness and autism would kill children than a group of masterminds... NWO had nothing to do with this, it wouldn't make sense, whereas someone with severe mental illness, wouldn't make sense, and hence would do something like this.

What Mental Illness do those in Armed Forces have? Have any children died in the Iraq War or Afghanistan war?

What Mental Illness does Anders Breivik have?

Let's say 9/11 wasn't a false flag for minute, what Mental Illness does the Aqaeda and Bin Laden have/had? If it was a false flag what Mental Illness do TPTB have?

It's not always mental illness.
I'm not saying the event wasn't horrific or that I am in anyway a Killer sympathiser but to put a tag on it "Only People with mental illness would kill children" is just too easy, life is much more complex and there are many scenarios that prove this.

Originally posted by starviego

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Don't be naive. Of course the gub'mint would let them die. Like they did teacher Dave Sanders at Columbine, whom they ignored for four hours until he finally bled to death.

What you and many others are failing to realize is this isn't Columbine. this was some clown willing to kill 6 year old children. But,you know what? There are things that are similar. How you ask? Well,let me tell you child.

See,# happens. The media reports on it and everyone gets their panties in a bunch because guess what??? The media wasn't right! Dave Sanders died because two idiots shot up a school.And guess what? The Police had to go through every room and make sure no one else was there.I'm going to stop there since MY comment was removed and yours wasn't. #ing mods are ridiculous sometimes.

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
And how did they handle it today? From a printed fact sheet they gave to all reporters at the same
time. That could have been done for every bit of info all along, could it not?

Sure. They could have done a lot of things they didn't do. It's obviously a very hectic scene with a lot of people dealing with a once in a lifetime situation. There is a huge difference between misinformation resulting from confusion and deliberate misinformation.

The more I read conspiracy sites the more I come to believe that conspiracy theorists tend to lack significant experience in how organizations actually operate in the real world.

It boggles my mind that anyone could look at the coverage coming out of there and still believe that an organized conspiracy could be going on. Look at how many people are there and how many agencies are represented.. How could you possible coordinate a conspiracy that keeps everyone quiet?

Originally posted by Flighty
If his mother was an avid collector of guns and she often talked about her "gun collection" at the local beer tasting every Tuesday (as has been reported), then it might be possible that she bought a few " under the counter" so to speak that aren't coming up under her name as they weren't legal.

I'm leaning towards to this idea as it seems to make the most sense.

I am not running with any of the media portraits I've been given of her.
She was a victim also and I am trying to recall if I've seen a photo of her.

Am I being told she was a prepper because this is considered a slur?
Am I being told she was an avid gun collector because it fits a certain narrative necessary to answer the
question of where and how Adam got guns?
So now she's down at Moe's Bar every Tuesday or whatever like Homer Simpson slurping down the beer?

How do I know this is true? This is the kind of stuff that would take a gumshoe up there to track down the story
if you wanted to know the facts of who these people are.

Why would I believe anything at this point the media tells me? It isn't like the track record in this case is
stellar and meticulous.

Maybe I had trouble with the story the shucking and jiving ME told us, too.
So sue me for being skeptical.

My last post, along with the fact that several windows were reported to be broken/shot out, the overall accuracy of the shots fired and the initial reports of other shooters seen outside in the bushes....?

well, you do the math..