Lone-nut scenario implanted in Colorado shooting, Holmes convicted by media
By Craig McKee
The official story is set within hours – sometimes even minutes.
We saw it with the Kennedy assassination(s), the Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, and many other proven conspiracies. Now we’re seeing it with the Colorado “Dark Knight” shooting that took place in an Aurora movie theatre on July 20.
Once the official narrative is set, it will rarely change substantially. New details will emerge but the initial story that we’ve been fed is locked in.
The official story of the shootings (in which 12 died and 58 were injured) is that 24-year-old neuroscience student James Holmes was mentally disturbed and acted alone. This is echoed in the media with few exceptions. Any information contradicting the official spin was, and continues to be, buried. Essential questions are not asked.
In the Colorado shooting, the media have focused on whether it was too easy for the suspect to get the weapons he allegedly used. They have questioned whether his psychiatrist told authorities of her concerns about Holmes’s mental state and whether she notified police. They have questioned whether the University of Colorado should have seen the potential for Holmes to commit a violent act and taken preventative action.
Despite early reports that the shooter may have had at least one accomplice, the media have stuck to the script, putting all their focus on questioning what would make an intelligent young university student become a killer. They take it as a given that he is the killer, just as the media has done with Lee Harvey Oswald for the past half century.
An ABC News report done minutes after the shooting set the stage by announcing that a “lone gunman” had been responsible. How did they know that? How could police tell them that so quickly? Interestingly, ABC anchor Rob Nelson, talking over live pictures from the Century 16 theatre, said: “This does fulfill a fear that we’ve all had as Americans, that we’ve reported on extensively at ABC News, and that is the proliferation of the lone wolf terrorist, and this could be an example of that.”
The report gets worse as Nelson then goes on to talk about the movie-goers as “soft targets”:
“If you think about airports, we know what the security is like there; we take off our shoes, we take off our belt and walk through those scanners, but we don’t do that on buses, we don’t do that on trains, in shopping malls, movie theatres and you have to wonder, once the dust settles, once we get past in initial shock of this, do we now begin a talk about security?” His co-anchor chirps in: “We’re so vulnerable.”
The push to impose an official version of this crime has come on two fronts. First, the authorities and the media dismiss any idea that the crime could have been a co-ordinated attack involving more than one shooter. Second, the media obediently report that Holmes is that one shooter. Major media reports not only don’t question whether others could have been involved, but they don’t allow Holmes a trial before deciding he is guilty. They don’t even acknowledge that there is no proof that he fired even one shot.
ABC News shamelessly and deliberately twisted the words of Holmes’s mother when she said, “You have the right person.” She meant that yes she is the mother of James Holmes. She didn’t even know the shooting had taken place at this point (ABC called her before 6 a.m.). They claimed she made this statement confirming that she wasn’t surprised to find that her son had shot up a movie theatre.
This was a blatant lie by ABC, which has mangled coverage of this story on so many levels. ABC also showed the 2006 video of James Holmes speaking at a science camp, labelling the footage: “first video of a killer.” The number of media reports – mainstream and otherwise – that simply call Holmes “the killer” are too numerous to list.
On the Colorado Public Television show Devil’s Advocate, University of Denver law professor David Kopel makes this incredible statement during a recent discussion of the shooting:
“The media’s actually hyper-scrupulous about calling the killer “the accused” or “the suspect.” That’s appropriate in about 99.9% of crime cases but here it’s absolutely certain he did this crime. There’s a question about whether he’s legally insane, but there’s no doubt… And yet because of media standards they still have this sort of Victorian sensibility about calling him the suspect.”
We don’t have to wait for a trial to pronounce someone “the killer” if we’re REALLY SURE he did it. And this guy teaches law. Well, if we can call Holmes a killer without needing a trial, why don’t we just lock him up for life without a trial, too? I mean, if we’re sure…
An ABC “virtual view” re-enactment was accompanied by this voice-over: “… a man in the front row got up, pretending to take a phone call. He went out the emergency exit, propping the door open behind him. Witnesses say he threw a green canister into the crowd, filling the theatre with smoke as if re-enacting a scene from a Dark Knight comic book. Witnesses say Holmes fired into the air and then started firing into the crowd.”
How do they know he was pretending to take a call? How would witnesses even know this? How does anyone know that the person who went out was the same person who came back in, dressed head to toe in full SWAT gear and gas mask? And how can witnesses say it was Holmes? No one ever saw Holmes in the theatre.
Then there’s witness Corbin Dates who has stated in great detail that a man with a goatee came in to theatre 9 and sat in the front, right row. He took a call on his phone and then walked to the emergency exit. He held the door open with his foot and gestured to someone outside.
Another unidentified witness calmly described in a TV interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnl_25VSNvs) that it was clear the shooter wasn’t working alone.
“From what we saw he wasn’t alone because the second can of tear gas didn’t come from his side.”
Why are these witnesses not being listened to? Why is their version of the story being suppressed?
Have any of the mainstream media questioned how a second gas mask ended up on the ground a couple of hundred feet away from the emergency exit? Did Holmes run to the corner of the building, drop it, and then run back to the car, all the while wearing the other gas mask? Are there surveillance tapes that show who put the mask there? Are there tapes that show Holmes entering or leaving the theatre?
And what about the trial of blood that leads out of the theatre and trails off as it heads to the same corner of the building where the gas mask was found? We’ve been told that victim Allie Young was shot in the neck, the bullet severing an artery. With blood literally spurting from her neck, she was helped by her friend out the emergency exit.
Instead of going to the lobby where all the other victims were exiting, they used the same exit the shooter used, walking the length of the building until they reached a waiting rescue vehicle several hundred feet away. Why wouldn’t the vehicle come to them instead of parking some distance away?
President Obama visited Young in the hospital, and we saw that her wound appeared to be healing beautifully, without bandages, after just three days. I’m no doctor, but…
And has anyone explained how a neuroscience student with no military training or experience could booby-trap his apartment with explosives so sophisticated that police took two days to disarm them?
Was Holmes a patsy, a victim of mind control? Was he actually sitting in his car in a drugged state while the shooting was taking place, ready to be arrested when it was over? Was the back story of him buying “legal” weapons over the Internet true? Was the notebook allegedly sent by Holmes to his psychiatrist, Dr. Lynne Fenton (a former Air Force psychiatrist), really found in the post office after escaping detection for a week?
How can it be explained that an exercise at Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine that required students to respond to a mass shooting in a movie theatre was going on the very same day that the actual shooting took place? We saw the same pattern of impossible coincidences with 9/11, the London 7/7 bombings, and the mass killings last year in Norway.
And why haven’t we heard more about the drowning death of an emergency room nurse who treated victims of the Aurora shooting?
We can be sure the mainstream media will never explore the possibility that Holmes was a drugged, mind-controlled patsy who was set up to take the fall for this crime, although this scenario makes a lot more sense than what we’ve been told.
No one can say that in his court appearance, Holmes looks like someone who was in school just a couple of months ago. Something happened to this young man, and it seems to have happened relatively suddenly.
The whole “Manchurian Candidate” scenario may sound far-fetched to some, but lawyers for Sirhan Sirhan think it explains his role in the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968.
We now know for sure that this was a conspiracy involving more than one shooter (Kennedy was shot from behind while many witnesses place Sirhan in front of Kennedy at all times). Even today, 44 years after that killing, Sirhan’s lawyers are fighting for his release from prison, alleging that he was a victim of hypno-programming .
If something like this happened to James Holmes – if he was set up to take the fall for a mass killing that had a hidden purpose – let’s hope it doesn’t take another 44 years to expose it.
- Posted in: 9/11 ♦ Assassinations ♦ Colorado shooting ♦ False flag operations ♦ Kennedy assassination ♦ London bombings 7/7 ♦ Mind control ♦ propaganda
- Tagged: 9/11, 9/11 truth, Colorado shooting, conspiracies, eyewitnesses, False flag operations, James Holmes, Kennedy assassination, L, Lee Harvey Oswald, London bombings, military exercises, Mind control, Norway killings, official story, propaganda, Robert Kennedy, Sirhan Sirhan