RSS Feed for This Post

ISMAIL AX WHY DO AC - AMERICAN CAPONS - IGNORE HIM?


rfid news

Beowulf, Michael Savage’s producer, saw it immediately. Did our Press-sheviks? They didn’t say. Have they looked, but not seen, to quote an old friend? Savage reported what Beowulf saw. “A. Ismail”, he’s the clearly printed return addressee on the Postal Airbill for the package sent NBC, allegedly, by Mr. Cho. “A. Ismail”. Did your instincts, from the outset, tell you something of this nature, sooner than later, would turn up? Mine did. Last night, Tele-mannequins gibbered about Cho-cho’s ‘Manifesto’. Why didn’t they mention what their videos plainly showed: ‘A. Ismail’, return addressee.

‘Ismail Ax’ is reportedly tatooed on Cho’s arm. Why? How does it relate to “A. Ismail”? Clearly, it does. We’re told the postal clerk recalls Cho-cho. Then, surely, at least one video should corroborate her. Our post office is studded with snitch-cams,as is yours. Where’s Cho-cho’s Postal debut?

You know Ishmael/Ismail’s symbolic meanings. Are “Ismail Ax” and “A. Ismail” mere products of a sick mind? Do you like anagrams? Loonies like them, too. Let’s have some fun! “A. Ismail”. “Ismail Ax”. “I Islam”? “Islamx”? “I Am Islam X”? Just asking. Why won’t press-sheviks ask? What’s the harm?

Have you seen Cho-cho’s videos? For an English major, he’s barely coherent. He perfectly centered himself on camera, difficult, even for accomplished photographers. Press-sheviks say he ‘rambled’. Do you see him as rambling? Or is he reading a script, one positioned at his lower left? Does it seem he’s not alone in the room? Haven’t we recently seen similar videos? Does Chooch’s speech pattern have an odd cadence? Yes, insane, so decreed the Court. What else? A lilt? Dare we call it an ‘adenoidal chant’? Does it sound in familiar? How about those young chaps in ‘Syrianna’?

Chooch indicts familiar bogeymen. Big cars. Cheeky women. Sound like a ‘jilted lover’? Domestic Violence hacks who trivialize crimes, including terrorism, and stupidly obsessess over ‘Domestic Violence’ should forever be discredited. They pronounce men bad, good sons evil, anoint vindictive spouses and avaricious murderous estate grifters, and demand Restraining Orders For All. Where were they? Chooch stalked and threatened two women. He set fire to a dorm. Where were the Victim Advocates? Scamming for Estate Grifter/Probate Mafia pals? The media parroted their drivel, by pronouncing Chooch a ‘jilted’, ‘jealous’ lover. Lovers are jilted daily. Ours is a world larded with the jealous. Few murder. Shouldn’t they be held accountable for their misleadings
? Aren’t they the ones who teach students to politely line up and await slaughter-by-Chooch? Talk about American Capon!

Cho-cho needn’t have toiled so hard. The usual suspects ably executed his advance work.

When a gun-wielding coward orders you to line up - don’t. First, they covet. Next, they lie. Lastly, they line you up. Comply? Never. Everything they say and do is false. Fight back. Their line-up is your death sentence. Compliance invigorates them. Resistance stops them. Reluctant warriors don’t fear weaselly lawyers who sue for self-defense against their tedious clients. Let them sue. Good people will back you. Try us.

Cho-cho might have been crazy, but he was surely organized. He purchased two pistols. The receipt in his backpack proved it. Didn’t it? So, why’d he file serial numbers from both guns yet keep the receipt for one in his backpack? Chooch surely knew he’d be known as the shooter. So, why file the numbers? Or, was it someone else, who wished to avoid detection? Was he Chooch’s handler? What became of the initially sought, ’second man’? ATF ballistics prove Cho shot his victims with the gun listed on the receipt? Filed serial numbers are routinely raised and matched to receipts. So, why tell a different story? Ballistics aren’t listed on receipts. Ballistics surely could link Cho’s gun to the shootings, but how could they link gun to receipt? Are ballistics supplied with new guns? I’m not aware of it. Are you? They’re surely not printed upon receipts, are they? What are we missing?

Chooch paid $571 for the 9mm pistola and at least $200 for the .22. A few hundred for ammo, flak vest, & smart accessories? Pretty soon, you’re talking real money - for a kid with no job, a recent arrival at VA Tech - from where? - whose parents are poor and run a small store. Gaps? Here’s a couple more: Computers, cameras, and other costly gadgets not easily mastered by disorganized offenders considered ‘insane’. Who’s his sponsor?

How about a big fat gap? Years ago, Virginia, amidst much fanfare, implemented an Instant Background Check for handgun purchases. Immediate acceptance or denial, based upon factual data, appealed to gun owners in and out of law enforcement. Why? It works. Why didn’t it in Chooch’s case?

A District Court upheld psychiatric findings. It declared Cho-cho a ‘Danger to himself’ but not ‘a danger to others’. Isn’t this an Involuntary Committment? Shouldn’t this have denied Chooch his guns? Involuntary Committment requires Court finding of serious mental illness. It affects gun rights as does a felony - you can’t own one. An Instant Check System, in particular, should have stopped the sale cold. Why didn’t it? Erroneous, incomplete records? Possible. Am I jumping to conlusions? Probably. But, please, enlighten us, how does a man adjudicated mentally ill, a ‘danger to himself’, pass a background check?

No one’s asking, let alone answering. Why not? Might the answers prove too unsettling?

Source and More : http://www.etherzone.com/2007/zecc042007.shtml

248 Read

Trackback URL