Brooklyn Subway Shooting Injures Multiple Passengers
A madman in cold blood, the result of societal division, or a coordinated false flag?
On April 12th, 2022, a rainy cold morning, a man dressed in a worker’s vest and sweatshirt exited the “N” line subway car at 36th and 6th. While onboard, the man had removed a gas mask from his bag, proceeding to release a canister which began to fill up the car with smoke. The man then open fired on the subway into passengers, injuring multiple passengers. The firearm was later reported to be a handgun, in addition a bag with fireworks, smoke producing materials, a hatchet and extra ammunition. A total of thirty-three shots were reported fired in the subway car, injuring over two dozen people. The shooting occurred during peak rush hour at approximately 8:24am.
As the train pulled into the station one witness from the next car began to film from a phone while running from the subway. As the doors to the car behind opened, smoke poured out as people ran out screaming. Footage shows an injured man staggering through the smoke, falling to the ground, next to others who had also been attacked. Photos show blood scattered across the subway station’s cement flooring, as some passengers attempted to give aid to those who were wounded. Upon closer investigation, many details in the shooting did not add up. This included everything from malfunctioning subway cameras, to the suspect leaving his ID at the scene of the crime. What caused this horrendous act of public violence? What measures could be set in place to stop similar future attacks? How will this event impact New York City’s increase in surveillance, and is stronger surveillance even a viable long-term solution towards the reduction of crime? Is crime higher in areas where possession of weapons by the citizens are knowingly banned?
A face covering in New York City is not rare sight, and citizens throughout the pandemic have used all sorts of masks, depending on their level of concern, and compliance, for the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Today, many immunocompromised rely on masks as a method of protection, while others rely on them as an opportunity for political expression. No matter the reason, New York City is a place where one can expect to see the most outrageous positions, from all walks of life. Initially masks were mandated during the pandemic when little was known about virus, and the acceptance of face coverings has since extended long past its expiration. It was only a few years ago someone covering their face in public would be at a higher risk of being stopped and questioned by police. Now it has become the norm, even frowned upon to go maskless, in some mask-enforced NYC spaces. The horrifying reality at the end of the day is that allowing face coverings in public areas of New York City are giving criminals the advantage when it comes to needing to avoid revealing their identity during an attack. That is, unless they drop a personal form of identification at the scene of the crime.
Statistics from the NYPD’s official website show that between 2021 and 2022 shooting incidents increased 13.8%, while the number of shooting victims saw a 14.5% increase. In addition, felony assaults citywide saw an 11.5% increase from the previous year. Despite the lockdowns being responsible for the reduction in crime, many other factors were also at play, including the corrupt de Blasio. Eric Adams must now take steps to ensure the security of the streets, yet his focus appears to lie at the forefront of social issues. Sadly, it took a terrifying act of violence to bring Eric Adams and the bureaucratic Hochul to re-evaluate the safety of the city outside of the confines of their state-issued security detail. Just because the roads seem safe from the perspective of the state elected official, does not mean the people who walk them are. In the case of Hochul, the term “elected” does not apply, as she was not, nor would she have been elected into the position of governor. Now that Hochul has sank her teeth into New York, and ridiculed the divinity of religion through its use as a medium for coronavirus propaganda, and brought small businesses to their knees.
Was This a False Flag Coordinated Attack to Influence Legislation?
While the origin of this attack is officially unknown, the possibility that it was a false flag attack coordinated to influence New York legislation, does hold concerning evidence. This is not to state that this was officially a false flag attack coordinated by an extension of federal entities, but if it were this amounting evidence does provided alarming details to support that theory. I’m not sure which is more concerning, an armed madman on a mission or an event planned by the United States government. The alternative, another third-party group may have been the driving force behind the shooter carrying out the attack in an effort to influence New York policy.
Thirty-three rounds. The shooter released thirty-three rounds inside of a subway car without killing a single individual. This would take precision and intent not to kill anyone, shooting thirty-three rounds within such a close proximity. While many aboard the subway reported the gun jammed during his attack, the firing of thirty-three rounds from a handgun into a subway car filled with fleeing passengers would be no easy task to avoid mortalities. In fact, it would take effort from the attacker.
New Era of Policing. On April 11th, just one day earlier, the NYPD released a statement1 which announced that they would enact a “new era of policing.” The post highlighted “taking guns off our street,” which could be seen as an effort to depict self-defense in a negative light. Living in New York City, residents must rely on the NYPD to protect them at all costs, even when they are locked on a speeding subway underground with no law enforcement in sight. The NYPD expects to ensure the safety of all citizens, normalizing vulnerability. Should self-defense be an option of the individual in a life-or-death situation? Should the citizen be fully reliant on the state for all forms of protection, even when the state fails to provide that protection? This unfortunate and problematic situation is something that a stronger state of surveillance would not improve. While some form of surveillance is important for ensuring a suspect is caught during a crime, it ultimately dissolves more of our day-to-day privacy, than it provides a suitable defense. Nobody wants to live inside of a totalitarian state of control, where every conceivable choice has been pre-determined and personal choice is suppressed, however a change needs to happen in order to reduce crime under the watch of the New York City Mayor Eric Adams.
“2022 marks a new era of policing. Across this city, thousands of our officers are doing their part to keep this city safe. Through precision policing & community engagement, we are suppressing violent crime & taking guns off our streets. This is your NYPD - we are here for you.”
- NYPD NEWS April 11th, 2022, 6:01pm
Not Terrorism. The day of the shooting, the incident was immediately reported by the NYPD to have absolutely no connection with terrorism. By definition, “terrorists” seek to inflict terror through violence. This seems to be clearly what happened.
Even the city’s Mayor Eric Adams stated2 “We will not allow New Yorkers to be terrorized even by a single individual.”
No Footage. Out of all of the thousands of cameras which exist throughout New York’s subway surveillance system, only the cameras which existed during the crime were not operational, the police citing that all footage was corrupted, or unusable.
Obvious Identity. Though this was such an extensively planned attack, the identity of the shooter was later discovered through a credit card which was dropped by the shooter during his escape.
NYC Bioweapon Testing. Between October 17th and October 30th, 2021, researchers subjected unsuspecting New Yorker’s to a biological weapons experiment, simulating an attack3. This included the releasing of “harmless gas” into the subway system, which were inhaled by nonconsenting passengers, and other New Yorkers. The harmless gas contained “tracer particles” which were dispersed throughout the densely populated New York subway system. The gas also contained “harmless” DNA, and other chemicals, which are “safe to ingest.” Did the success of the “harmless gas experiment” influence the violent and deranged actions of the Brooklyn subway shooter?
Prison Planet. During an interview with MSNBC, Maurice DuBois asked Eric Adams his thoughts regarding metal detectors, asking if this was an answer to resident’s safety. Eric Adams’ responded that he had plans to scan the country, even the world in order to find ways to merge technology with “safety,” in an effort to surveil all individuals to identify illegal guns. Once implemented, what other measures could this increased surveillance also be used for?
“Is the time now to consider putting in something like metal detectors to prevent people with weapons and metal and this kind of thing from getting on the train?” WCBS anchor Maurice DuBois asked. “People just need to feel safe. Is that one of the answers?”
“I truly believe that,” Adams replied. “I’m often criticized when I talk about technology being used to identify those who are carrying illegal guns. This is why I am sending my deputy mayor of public safety to scan the entire country and globe to find ways that we could identify guns. We must marry technology with safety and I am going to be willing to do so.”
- Eric Adams, NYC Mayor
Following Eric Adams’ statement, his communications director Maxwell Young clarified the mayor’s wording ensuring that NYC’s future security would not become as elaborate as the airport scanners, requiring the removal of shoes and belts, before each flight. Young confirmed that the mayor was a frequent subway rider, despite his campaign vow if he was elected to ride his bike to work each day. This does not change the fact that Eric Adams wants to increase the state of surveillance instead of making other policy changes, targeting criminals, such as the increased ability to carry methods for personal self-defense, among other things.
“Just to clarify here, @NYCMayor was talking about using innovative technology to keep the subways safe. He was (of course) not saying we should consider using airport style metal detectors. He’s a frequent rider and obviously knows that’s not practical.”
Frank R. James - Something inside Frank R. James compelled him to drive across the country to injure — not kill — individuals, only to flee the scene of the crime leaving mounds of evidence behind. The shooter, 62, drove from Wisconsin, stopping in Philadelphia before arriving in New York City, and entered the subway system. While it is unknown the extent of the perpetrator’s intentions, one can only image the horrors which were to be carried out judging by the contents of his leftover bag.
The suspect was later discovered in Manhattan where he was arrested. New York Post reported that according to police, upon his arrest the suspect — knowing that his freedom had come to an end — stated, “I’m Frank, I’m the person you’re looking for. I’m surprised it took so long.4”
The rampant increase in crime appears almost coordinated, as if an attempt to sway public judgement. Increasing shootings, lootings, and murders consistently projected fear into residents, as the safety of this great city declines. In an effort to rally up more support, and gain more secure footing for the popular approval of mass surveillance and the disposal of the right to privacy.
The Brooklyn subway shooter, although 62, could himself be considered a product of the societal division which Americans are subjected to through mainstream media propaganda and political correctness. Although it remains difficult to determine what inspired such a horrifying attack, the subway shooter’s actions were carried out under the influence of division and discourse propagated through modern media and political movements.
It is instances like this which demand the awareness of violent criminal activity in New York City, despite the extreme city laws prohibiting any form of self defense. Stricter gun laws could not have helped this situation, as the firearm was likely obtained illegally. Disarming residents allows any criminal looking to engage in violent activity the reassurance of knowing they cannot be stopped unless law enforcement is present. Combine the prohibition of self defense, with institutional encouragement to cover your face, along with the subtle reduction of the police force, and what’s left is an out of control, unsafe crime-ridden city.