ATS Beware of Jared Loughner discussions! You're being drawn into a media trap!

Well it looks like the media has conjured up a nice big juicy steak for everyone to sink their teeth into for the next week.

1. Conspiracy theorists are nut jobs. Check.
2. People who discuss or believe in 2012 Prophecy are nut jobs. Check.
3. People who believe the twin towers were control demolition are nut jobs. Check.
4. People who are mentally imbalanced may shoot other people. Check.
5. Should we crack down on gun laws? Check.

I'm sure I've missed something.

reply to post by rexusdiablos

If you read the threads Jared posted, most members on this forum who responded to him, commented that he made no sense. They were not mean to him and actually showed him some mercy for his obvious mental illness.

From my experience on here, most ATS members were not born yesterday and have little respect for the murderous musings of psychopaths. That includes the media's effort to create murderous hatred in the public square towards Sarah Palin (Fox News, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, Internet, too) and the Tea Party. Most people on ATS are seeing right through the Corporate media's effort of building public hysteria for social, legal, political and market manipulation.

It is obvous to most that the corporate media is finding it difficult to compete with the opposition voices on the air and Internet and they are trying to whip up the public to permit Obama to take them off the air and off the Internet in the name of "hate speech." That includes ATS. The political left just got soundly beaten in the last election and are extremely angry that the socialist party is over in Washington.

Speaking or skin ripper how come I cannot comment on his BS thread he created.

reply to post by Rocky Black


I clicked on his profile and I think he was banned.

reply to post by liejunkie01


I can see why that thread was total BS.

Take care

Live free or die state.
RB

There is another thread going about Loughner being represented by the same lawyer as Theodore John "Ted" Kaczynski the unabomber and Timothy James McVeigh the Alfred P. Murrah building bomber. The FBI still have Teds shed in storage somewhere. All three shared anti government views. Teds "camp" were anti technology archetypes who believed technology was creating unfair advantage. McVeigh's "camp" responded to Waco and the right to bare arms, government spending on minorities etc.

The Loughner case among other things has a 9 year old girl one of 50 born on 9/11 listed as a murder victim. Some have speculated that this will be connected emotionally to the truther movement which claims 9/11 was a government operation. There are a few odd things about her being nicknamed "Princess" (where does that come from) and her believing 9/11 was a holiday (which sounds kind of backwards also depending on your perspective).

Independent ATS thinkers like guns
Independant ATS thinkers don't like guns

For the looks, this person went deviant .Questions; 1- If according with the version of the college receiving threats from this guy and being reported to the sheriffs office,theres no arrest made??....2- IF this person is en reality a crazy one because have internet sites,and post a lot of his nonsense ideas,that mean that having a farewell writtens in his house ,call and old friend admitting smoking pot for a nnumber of years,buy a gun thru the proper channels,then saturday call a taxi an go to the mall and shoot inocent people isnt this PREMEDITED??

reply to post by fianna


All I have to say to you is regardless of your political affiliation, your comment is way out of line and extremely offensive.

reply to post by schuyler


That left wing thing was a lie put out by the right wing msm....You really should check your sources,
as no one wants to post fiction as fact....Right?

Alternative media sites like this are in direct opposition to the business model of CFR-ideologue mass media outlets in the US. For that reason alone they will not mention this website or direct anyone to it, purposefully or not.

Now whether the CIA or FBI will infiltrate this website (or already have) to either a.) plant propaganda, or b.) get a general feel, to gauge and understand, the opinions of alternative-media sites' members - that's an entirely different story.

So far I haven't seen ATS mentioned in any MSM reporting myself.
And a quick Google News search turns up nothing related to ATS.
The only ATS I am seeing in the news is "against the spread".

reply to post by rexusdiablos


I agree with this, and i have not wrote anything in these threads. They want to label all people with all kinds of labels, and you did nothing, but they still want to label you a loon or something as you post on a board someone may have posted on.

I can't imagine anyone that is truly a part of the ATS community doing anything at all apart from condemning this sick man and his actions.
He did not as far as I can tell have any friends here and never expressed any views on ATS that had anything to do with these tragic events.

If the media want to make any kind of link then it's just the usual grasping at every little detail in order to fill up the endless stream of 24 hour news where facts take a back seat to speculation and ill informed opinion

reply to post by rexusdiablos


They've never actually taken down a forum.

I see no reason to worry.

Originally posted by Sabreblade
So far I haven't seen ATS mentioned in any MSM reporting myself.
And a quick Google News search turns up nothing related to ATS.
The only ATS I am seeing in the news is "against the spread".

How about today's article on the The Washington Post?

Separate thread here. Delete if this post is sufficient in bringing the article to the attention of the ATS community.

reply to post by rexusdiablos


I think the media is way too busy trying to throw the blame on Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh etc.

Blaming this site will do nothing to help the progressive agenda so you have nothing to worry about. They might go for the whole "we need to control the internet" thing, but they are already working on that regardless.

I find it sad that we live in a culture that must always find a scapegoat for the acts of individuals.. like: The rap music made him do it, or the video games, or violent movies....ridiculous. The main stream media in the country is a freaking joke.

reply to post by schuyler


Hmmm...you congratulate ATS about not capitalizing on the tragedy and in the same post you take the opportunity to denigrate "lefties" in defense of those you pointed out. Check your facts. Jared Loughner was neither a "leftie", nor a "pothead".

Not a leftie

For what it's worth, the Washington Post reports that 22-year-old alleged Tucson shooter Jared Lee Loughner is a registered independent.

Not a pothead

Tierney was surprised when Loughner said he had quit partying "completely." Loughner, according to Tierney, said, "I'm going to lead a more healthy lifestyle, not smoke cigarettes or pot anymore, and I'm going to start working out." Tierney was happy for his friend: "I said, 'Dude, that's awesome.' And the next time I saw him he was 10 pounds lighter." Tierney never saw Loughner smoke marijuana again, and he was surprised at media reports that Loughner had been rejected from the military in 2009 for failing a drug test: "He was clean, clean. I saw him after that continuously. He would not do it."

as far as the poster Erad3 finding no like minds here, yes, that's true.

However, we all know how the fearful react to tragic situations. They go into panic mode, and every person, place or thing related to the suspect is guilty by association. Sadly, many of the sheeple follow right along.

How would you guys think the convo went at the alphabet agencies when this site was brought up?

"He was a member of abovetopsecret.com, where he wrote about his distorted views of reality."
"How did the other members respond to him?"
"Oh, they didn't share his opinions, one even told him to seek professional help."
"Well good for them. Those people obviously don't share his psychosis."

OR...

"He was a member of abovetopsecret.com, a radical website where people chat about world domination by elite powers, UFO encounters , apocalyptic events, revolution, conspiracies and an entire host of fringe topics."
"Johnson- put tags on the hot words that appear on that website, find out everything you can about everyone who interacted with him in any capacity. Check the membership, find out if it's a front for something else. I want to know everything that's discussed on there....."

I really doubt if they care that he found no one who supported or agreed with his ideas here. The fact that we talk about taboo issues here, some of which will certainly draw parallels to some of his incoherent rambling, will be enough to draw attention- all negative- to the site and the members here.

I see three possible outcomes, based on the media reaction I have seen. For brevity, JLL will refer to the shooter in the Tucson incident. The outcomes are based on the following media reactions I have seen:

1. JLL was a fringe fanatic of Tea Party ilk. He was mentally unstable, but first and foremost his political rants mirrored conspiracy theories of "Sovereign Citizen" movements and conservative punditry by Sarah Palin, Glen Beck and others.

2. JLL was a fringe lefist. He was mentally unstable, but first and foremost his political rants reflected his reading of the Communist Manifesto. He's a "left-wing pothead".

3. JLL was probably politically motivated, but first and foremost his psychological disorder caused him to undertake the shooting and killing or injuring of so many people. His mental disorder should have been acknowledged by authorities prior to the massacre as there were plenty of warning signs.

From these three points of view, we can see that depending on the political leaning of the person or network, FOX and Conservative AM radio espouse the second view, MSNBC and liberal writers espouse the first view. However, overarching either of the first two views is the third, which is valid. However, when the first and second view points are contextualized within the framework of the third viewpoint, I see a problematic scenario.

Today I passingly clicked over to FOX and heard Megyn Kelly interview a psychologist who stated that in Arizona the public has the right to report a mentally unstable person to the authorities for mental evaluation.

Has anybody else heard such a response to this issue? Should we worry that people who hold non-official opinions about current political or social issues be labeled "nuts" (clinically, mentally ill) and transferred to the custody of the State?

I'm just saying, aren't there historical occurrences of so-called fringe or non-mainstream thinkers being labeled as insane? Would this not be a convenient way of dismissing or silencing people with alternative views on issues - views that are not mentioned by the government or news ("or" being an optional word in that phrase).

My caution would be that all of a sudden, those of us who feel like opining here on ATS or on other cites, especially on topics such as the war, economics, and other more tangent social or intellectual issues (not necessarily the even less accepted issues of UFOs, paranormal theories, religious discussion and so forth) be labeled in this way. Hypothetically, mandating blanket psychological observations and potentially State-imposed institutionalization.

This need not be a conspiracy as I believe most would consider conspiracy to imply intent. However, insofar as conspiracy requires at least two people conjointly aspiring towards an end result, even if that result is not nefarious in the conspirators' minds, this would still be a conspiracy to rid society of undesirable thought. That is to say, whether the thought is labeled "unpatriotic" (as would be the product of a traditional tyrannical government) or merely "hazardous to public safety" (as would be the product of a public awareness campaign seeking safer schools, etc.), the end result would be the silencing of alternative or marginalized thought.

The psychologists enlisted to observe and pass judgment on the individuals would be modern day inquisitors, basically utilizing the "official story" (not merely in the 9/11 truth movement's jargon) as the basis of stability and mental health. Anything straying away from that would be "not normal".

We'll see...I guess. Possibilities are endless, outcomes are singular.

EDIT: I know that here in Florida we have the Baker Act. How exactly the language in that act could be twisted to permit institutionalization at the whim of a third party is not something I would know off the cuff. Perhaps a lawyer here? The psychologist interviewed on FOX said that Virginia and Arizona both have the law I mentioned above that allows for concerned citizens to report a person for mental evaluations.