In a southern city recently, at a bank, a lone gunman (gunperson?) shot and killed several people in cold blood. Of course, as these deranged people often do, the shooter left a manifesto, and you may find it curious what was in it.

Before we get to that, though, to give some context to what we’re about to talk about, you should know that there is a type of political operation called a false flag (event). If you’re not familiar with the term, wikipedia defines it this way:

A false flag operation is an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party. The term “false flag” originated in the 16th century as an expression meaning an intentional misrepresentation of someone’s allegiance.

So, for example, the Nazi’s burning of the Reichstag (German legilature building) and blaming the arson on Jews was a false flag event that was done to give an excuse to harass and blame Jews.

Now, going back to the Louisville shooter, after you hear more about the shooter’s manifesto, you may begin to wonder if they committed those murders as a false flag event. Joseph Mackinnon writes,

It now appears that the pronoun-providing Louisville shooter may have ultimately spilled blood in part to help Democrats spill ink on gun control legislation.

A neighbor of the shooter told the New York Post that the apparent gun-control activist’s 13-page manifesto was discovered by his roommate Dallas Whelan. It is now in the possession of the Louisville Police Department.

The Daily Mail reported that the manifesto made three key points: “He wanted to kill himself, he wanted to prove how easy it was to buy a gun in Kentucky and he wanted to highlight a mental health crisis in America.”

If accurate, then Democrats may have made use of the slaughter of Josh Barrick, Deana Eckert, Tommy Elliott, Juliana Farmer, and Jim Tutt Jr. as their killer intended.

To be clear, because the shooter didn’t disguise who committed these shootings, the Louisville shooting can’t technically be called a false flag even, but it’s intent was the same: It was to paint a narrative blaming the incident on people who weren’t involved in the incident. In this case, the shooter (who is the only one to blame for the shooting) was trying to blame legal gun ownership and, by extension, legal gun owners for shootings in this country, even though it is people who illegally have firearms who commit most of those crimes.

So, no, that horrible shooting wasn’t a false flag event, but, like terrorism, it was done to push a narrative and to try to make innocent people look evil.