Skip to main content

Conspiracy theories make entertaining political theater. President Obama is a Kenyan born, Marxist, fascist tool of the Wall St., Jewish world cabal, intent on destroying our freedoms for the benefit of the corporate communists that control him.

good guy with a gun

Sometimes, conspiracy theories implode on themselves. Our freedoms are preserved by the 2nd Amendment solution of shooting first and checking facts later. This theory worked for the looney putz who shot Trayvon Martin – just see how free he’s been since ‘defending his rights’ to protect society from the kind of teen who drinks Snapple and snacks on Skittles.

The Trayvon Martin killing would never have happened, if only teen Trayvon had also been armed. He could have whipped out his own weapon when he turned to confront George Zimmerman for stalking him. Since Zimmerman was stalking Martin, then, according to NRA theory, Martin would have been within his rights to blast away at Zimmerman, no questions asked.

This theory was tested by the great state of Mississippi, last week. An unarmed suspect in a police station interrogation room shot and killed the armed detective who was questioning him. The facts, as presented by state officials, are straightforward and constitute the dream argument of the NRA. The suspect was being questioned about a crime. He had not been convicted or even charged with the crime, therefore, under our system of presuming innocence until after proof of guilt, he was innocent. He was being stalked by the police, who had decided that he was guilty – just as George Zimmerman stalked Trayvon Martin after deciding that he was guilty.

The unarmed suspect shot the armed detective, applying a stalking victim’s right to use a 2nd Amendment solution to being stalked. The detective, of course, had years of training and more years of experience in handling confrontational situations. So under the, NRA’s school-guard theory of life, there was simply no possibility that what we are told actually did happen could happen. But even though it couldn’t, it did, and in NRA retrospect it was an entirely justified, self-defense, stalking response shooting.

That is, of course, if you are foolish enough to believe the lies that the liberal media are trying to spoon feed the world about what happened. But, as any good conspiracy theorist could explain, the facts don’t add up, the story has been “altered” and simple scientific logic disproves the official account.

First, let’s set the facts straight, as every good conspiracy theory must. We have all seen innumerable police procedurals on TV and in the movies. We know how interrogations go. A suspect is taken into a small, bare room, holding a table with chairs on two sides. The handcuffed suspect is either shackled to one of the chairs or to a ring mounted on the table. When entering the room, the interrogator, or interrogators leave their weapons in lock boxes outside. While in the room with the suspect, the interrogators maintain distance and space between themselves and the shackled suspect, usually sitting on the opposite side of the table from him.

As we know from Youtube and other social media platforms, the threat of police misconduct charges, and claims that confessions are improperly obtained, has led to every police facility videotaping interrogations. Such videos pop up when people want to humiliate suspects or the police, or when prosecutors want to show the video to jurors, as in Arizona’s Jodi Arias murder trial.

But look at the Mississippi facts we have been given. They just don’t add up. The initial reports of the shooting in the interrogation room said that there were more than one police officers in the room at the time. Only later in the day did the liberal media get the word to say that it was only the suspect and the black detective. If there was the usual pair of detectives, good cop – bad cop style, then the entire story falls apart.

Even if the interrogating officers had been armed, completely outside of standard protocol, with two in the room, there is no possibility that an unarmed suspect could have gotten the gun from one detective, then shot him four times, without the other detective intervening.

Scroll to Continue

Recommended Articles

For the unarmed suspect to get up and grab one detective’s gun and start firing, would mean that he was not shackled either to the chair or to the table, or even handcuffed. An unbelievability. We don’t know what happened in the room, because the police department hasn’t yet released the video of the interrogation. So we are left to speculate about whether the suspect was shackled, and if not why not.

The Tea Party blogosphere has focused on the fact that the detective was black. As one East Texas Klan blogger wrote, this was bound to happen, when affirmative action forced the police department to put a black man into a white man’s job. The same people who are asking the Supreme Court to ratify voter disenfranchisement and resegregation of universities are now also saying that black people are not qualified to be police detectives.

But consider the implications. If the police department knew that it had been forced to promote an unqualified black man to detective, they would have closely supervised him, to protect themselves from any mistakes he made, and document the error of his promotion. Thus, if the “affirmative action” argument is true, then we know that the detective didn’t carry his weapon into the interrogation room. We know that he didn’t allow the suspect to roam free and un-handcuffed in the room. Because the detective’s white superiors and co-workers wouldn’t have allowed it, simply to save their own lives and the lives of their professional brethren.

So again, using the most conservative arguments and facts to analyze the situation, we are forced to the conclusion that something else happened in that Mississippi interrogation room, and the liberal media, in cahoots with Mississippi’s white police establishment, is actively covering up the truth.

Inquiring minds will want to wonder what really went down in Mississippi last week. So far in 2013, five U.S. Supreme Court ‘justices’ stated publicly that they want to roll back minority voting rights, and want to eliminate minority enrollment in colleges and graduate schools. A black mayoral candidate was assassinated in Alabama. And the Tea Bag Republican Party has called for North Carolina to establish the for-profit Southern Baptist church as the state’s official religion.

Isn’t it most likely that the “suspect” was actually an informant, bringing to the black detective information he had learned about Klan plans, or efforts to further curtail minority voting rights. Or perhaps he had learned of new plans for corruption, vote buying, police complicity with drug lords, or the importers of cheap but illegal immigrant workers.

When the white supervisors ‘keeping an eye’ on the affirmative action detective, observed him learning about corruption or incipient white supremacy plans, they had to act. The informant had to die and the detective who had learned too much had to be silenced. The story about the suspect grabbing the detective’s gun was just the cover story to hide the true conspiracy.

See how easy it is to use ‘facts’ to explain confused circumstances.

I heard another one, the other day. I was told that President Obama is using secret Pentagon funds and ‘assets’ to infiltrate the Vietnamese government, so that the U.S. can take that government over. This secret effort is, apparently, part of President Obama’s plan to convince the American people that he’s really a conservative, and is going to win the war that Eisenhower and Nixon couldn’t win. I’m a little uncertain, yet, about how he’s going to use this “secret” process to improve his very public approval ratings. But that’s just a matter of tuning up the story, to improve its logic.

Tom Hall

Tom Hall

Monday, 8 April 2013