posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:18 PM
Nearly everytime a government wants to bring in gun contol to a country, there seem's to be a rise in the amount of "random" shootings as the gun
control topic is discussed. Just like here in Australia, when a year or 2 before the Port Arthur shootings, [which then led to Australia's current
gun laws], New South Wales premier Barry Unsworth stood up in parliament and said on record that "we will never have uniform gun laws in Australia
until we have a massacre in Tasmania [an island state at the bottom of Australia]. This comment was made after the gun laws proposal was knocked back
in parliament at an early shooting in Victoria.
Why would a premier of one state directly refer to another state as having a massacre, which would then lead to new gun laws, which approx. 2 years
later is EXACTLY what happened in the EXACT place he threatened it would.
And just as it seems everytime they try and pass new gun laws through the US congress, there seems to be a series, or increase of "random" shootings
that seemed very well timed to support the arguement for gun control. But when the new laws are rejected, the "random" shootings seem to decrease,
if not even stop, but as soon as its on the agenda again, out come all the "lone gunman random shootings" ????
But the one thing that Port Arthur, Aruora picture threatre, and Sandy Hook have in common are that the official versions are full of contradicting
holes, and all have eye witnessess reporting a t least a 2nd gunman that is never reported in the official version. And another thing they have in
common is that they are all events used as a bargining tool at the gun control negotiating table ! And what better time to stage a false flag attack
then when it perfectly suits your agenda for gun control !
When you join the dots and look at these shootings collectively, you'll see the obvious pattern, but if you look at these shootings from an
individual random gunman point of view, you'll just dismiss it as "just another shooting from a mentally disturbed person".
It's ironic that Obama wants gun control laws, yet has made NO MENTION of WHY weapons companies are allowed to manufacture these guns and sell them
for profit, yet then bring in a law that would make anyone buying the weapon a criminal. Will his new gun laws also include the weapons and defense
companies that profit from the sale of these weapons ? Or will they mysteriously be excluded from such new laws due to the powerfull lobbying presence
they have ?
And remember, it was said that US citizens have the right to bare arms, and the main reason this was included was because this IS the LAST defence
against either a corrupt government, or a corrupt police or military force.
And since the Port Arthur shootings we have had Australian Prime Minister after Prime Minister bringing in whatever laws they want regardless of if it
was wanted or even voted for or against. The Australian government knows that Australian's are techniqually unarmed, and ever since this has happened
its been right after right slowly stripped away. Slow enough so that it happens, but not fast enough so that the average person notices.
But the question is..........................when the next well timed "random" shooting happens, will you join the dots and not believe a media that
has been caught lying to you on every other occassion, or will you fall for it all again ? And nothing against the average US citizen, but the US
administration is one of the most corrupt in history, and they have a PROVEN history of staging false flag attacks to suit their own agenda, even if
its at the expense of the lives of its own citizens, and please remember this the next time you try and defend that administration, or its policies !