Tuesday, December 18, 2012

The father of Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza, a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial, one of the many corporations owned and controlled by the international central b
anks, and was also a partner at Ernst & Young. ¹ The father of James Holmes is Robert Holmes, and, at the time of the shooting, the lead fraud scientist for the credit score company FICO. ²

FICO works with all major banks and is directly connected to the function of London Inter-Bank Offered Rate, or LIBOR. I have read the claim, in both cases, that these men were actually slated to testify in the LIBOR hearings before the U.S. Congress, but I have not been able to find anything substantial or conclusive to prove that. Both men, however, it has been evidenced, were quite knowledgeable on the LIBOR interest rate fixing scandal, with at least the potentiality to be subpoenaed for testimony in hearings regarding the fraudulent scheme.

16 international central banks have been implicated in this ongoing scandal, accused of rigging contracts worth trillions of dollars. This is undoubtedly the largest financial fraud scheme within our collective lifetimes, and I would venture to say, in the history of the world.

If you think that the international banking mafia/cartel is not capable of murder, and it all sounds too impossible to believe that these incidents are more than coincidences, consider the case of Kevin Krim. Kevin was a CNBC executive responsible for publishing news of a $43 trillion lawsuit that implicated "top government officials in the Obama White House along with several major US banks, bankers involved in the wrongdoing, and their profiteering cronies." ³

His family ended up murdered the day after with the mild-mannered, highly-praised nanny being blamed for the murders. If all of these situations sound more like coincidences rather than conspiracies to you, then it seems to me that you don't know exactly how ruthless these crooks are. Suffice it to say, that to compare them to the mafia in terms of murderous ruthlessness could best be paralleled by respectively comparing the New York Yankees to a Little League team.

They literally persuade governments to start wars, so that they can finance both sides, and no matter who wins or loses, they are always winners, because they will always be receiving their interest payments at the end of any given conflict. You need look no further than to investigate who financed the Nazis to build them up into a power that would be dangerous enough to justify a second world war, which they desperately sought, in order to increase support for the establishment of the UN, with the overall goal being one world government, otherwise known as the New World Order. The Rockefellers, the Morgans, and even Prescott Bush, father of George HW Bush, are all implicated in being party to the international banking cartel, and, at best, indirect financiers of Hitler's Nazi party.

Another factor of consideration is the fact that we have seen the most marked increase in "mass shootings," and incidents billed as "mass shootings," since the time that the UN small arms treaty has been being considered here in the US. Not only have these two incidents shown marked discrepancies between "official" accounts, the Sikh Temple shooting as well had eyewitness accounts of multiple suspects(four shooters with a paramilitary appearance, in this case), with the "official" story claiming that there was only one shooter.

As I understand it, one of the primary containments of the UN's global government grab is the fact that the US' citizenry is too heavily armed to force or coerce into the global government scheme without it becoming, most undoubtedly, the most monumental conflict in human history without a formal declaration of war. Any country, to the best of my knowledge, that has given up their gun rights, has experienced increased oppression and police brutality, as well as increased home invasions and gun related homicides perpetrated by outlaws.

Indeed, there is literally not much of an argument to make in the way of gun control, as most criminologists who were initially in favor of gun control, throughout their research on the subject, and their careers, have largely ended up supporting gun rights. 4 From the article that my annotation just referenced, this information is presented:

[Principal among the facts that [Dr.]Wolfgang [Kleck] was disappointed to learn, is that guns are used for self-defense between 2.1 million and 2.5 million times every year. The following facts from the Kleck/Gertz study, relate directly to this fact:

In the vast majority of those self-defense cases, the citizen will only brandish the gun or fire a warning shot.
In less than 8% of those self-defense cases will the citizen will even wound his attacker.
Over 1.9 million of those self-defense cases involve handguns.
As many as 500,000 of those self-defense cases occur away from home.
Almost 10% of those self-defense cases are women defending themselves against sexual assault or abuse.
This means that guns are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of law-abiding citizens than to take a life.
At an estimated 263 million US population, in 1995, when the study was released, it also means that an average of 1 out of every 105 to 125 people that you know will use a gun for self-defense every year.

Dr. Kleck also wrote in his book titled "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America (Social Institutions and Social Change)" that burglars are more than three and a half times more likely to enter an occupied home in a gun control country than in the USA. Compare the 45% average rate of Great Britain, Canada and Netherlands with the 12.7% of the USA. He continued to point out that citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals every year as do police (1,527 to 606). In a related article titled, "Are We a Nation of Cowards'?" in the November 15, 1993 issue of Newsweek Magazine, George Will reported that police are more than 5 times more likely than a civilian to shoot an innocent person by mistake.]

In my opinion, these incidents, as well as discrediting and/or intimidating potential witnesses in the LIBOR scandal hearings, are poorly disguised attempts at manipulating the population of the US into a state of fear that will provide popular support for increased restrictions on gun rights, with the eventual goal being gun confiscation. We have certainly seen similar tactics used by our government in the OKC bombing, which was perpetrated to gain support for un-Constitutional "anti-terrorism" legislation being passed by the Clinton Administration. 5

If we allow this to happen, I believe it will not be too long before we find ourselves in a dystopian nightmare of oppression and tyranny imposed by a global communistic government, and we will only have ourselves to blame if we allow this to happen, as we have seen the warning signs before, if only we have been paying attention…






Supporting video evidence:

No comments:

Post a Comment