[Nowhere Man]

The end will always justify the means for a true radical like Obama. The best way to implement radical change is not by arguing logically against the existing policy, but instead by finding ways to drastically change public perception so that the existing policy is considered morally reprehensible. Wonder of all wonders, ever since Obama took office we’ve had all sorts of little events (events that were rare in the past, one might add) which suddenly seem to call for the solution that Obama has wanted all along.

It seems fishy and I wouldn’t put anything past a textbook sociopath like Obama. Again, I’m not usually given to conspiracy theories. Still, at this point nothing would surprise me.

Whether is is thing like MK-ULTRA, tanking the economy to generate more discontent or even if it is a case of "stuff happens" where it is just a convenient opportunity, I would not put anything above Obummer and Co. to use it for their causes.

[butterdezillion]

If you look at a visual (at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3068218/posts?page=57#57 ) of the frequency of these massacres (only those with at least 2 more fatalities than the Gabby Giffords shooting) , you see the massacres under Obama began in March of 2009. There were FOUR massacres that year and at least one every year since then.

The run on the bank was in early September of 2008. These massacres began suddenly 3 months after Obama took office. For 6 months after the run on the bank there were no massacres and then after 3 months of Obama in the White House we had 3 massacres within a month’s time and another one later that year. Each of them more deadly than Tucson.

That doesn’t sound like it’s bad-economy-induced “snapping”.

Makes me wonder how long the MK Ultra stuff has to be going in order to have a plausible “schizophrenia/mental illness” cover for assassins. Three months?