BREAKING: Active shooting at YouTube headquarters “Gun-free zone” fails yet again, mysteriously…

Mike Adams–An armed gunwoman has opened fire inside the YouTube headquarters in San Bruno, California, multiple news sources are reporting. NOTE: This post may be updated as new facts unfold. Check back often…

According to CNBC, the shooter was female, and she is now dead. Multiple casualties have been reported, and local hospitals are reporting receiving those casualties. It is not yet known how many are injured or dead, but hospitals are reportedly expecting “four to five patients,” Stanford Health Care told CNBC.

This comes on the exact same day, by the way, that I unleashed a tweetstorm against YouTube for censoring my entire content channel without justification or explanation. It now appears that tweetstorm will go nowhere, since many of the people who could potentially respond to such requests were apparently busy ducking behind cover and barricading themselves in their cubicles. The reason I even mention this is because no doubt some left-wing media lunatic (previously known as “journalists”) will try to link the shooting with my tweetstorm activism effort, since the only thing they know how to publish is fake news that maliciously attacks responsible citizens who own firearms.

There are four possible explanations for the motivation of the shooter, see below:

Four possible motivations for the shooting

As explained in my emergency broadcast podcast, above, there are four possible motivations for this shooting:



Possibility #1) ISIS terrorism – The dishonest left-wing media fails to report this, but ISIS has openly called for attacks on social media technology providers such as Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

Possibility #2) False flag operation to blame gun owners – To help push the “gun ban” narrative that’s now being desperately regurgitated by the anti-freedom left-wing media, a false flag operation could easily be plotted and carried out that would link the shooter to conservative organizations like the NRA or InfoWars. Note that the FBI routinely plots terrorism attacks all across the United States and even helps would-be terrorists nearlycarry them out.

Possibility #3) Disgruntled YouTube employee / personal reasons – As I’ve stated on the record many times, YouTube employees are evil people engaged in an evil empire of censorship and oppression. It would not surprise me at all if some of those evil people started turning on each other in fits of uncontrolled violence. This is what happens when you surround yourself with evil people who despise freedom, truth and the right to self-defense. It also makes me wonder how many lives might have been saved if YouTube employees were allowed to carry concealed firearms in their own defense. But no, they “hate” guns, and so some of them die in a hail of bullets, utterly defenseless but apparently committed to their own self-destructive false beliefs. It would have only taken one competent employee with a concealed carry firearm to stop the shooter, but apparently guns are not allowed in the hands of law-abiding workers at Google / YouTube. Only criminals get to carry them there, it seems.

Possibility #4) Disgruntled video content owner who got banned by YouTube – It’s well known that YouTube recently banned firearms videos, instantly terminating thousands of firearms video channels. This is on top of the widespread demonetization attack YouTube has been waging on conservative channels since the Trump victory in 2016. With YouTube destroying the livelihoods of so many people and censoring their First Amendment speech rights, is it possible that one of those individuals who was harmed by YouTube may have snapped and “gone postal” against YouTube employees?

It’s just speculation at this point, of course, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility. It makes me wonder what else might unfold as YouTube continues to wage war against half the American people who have valuable, conservative views to share online. It also brings up the question: How will YouTube react if this was a revenge shooting? Will they ban all women, given that the woman was a shooter? Will they ban all white people if the shooter was white? Will YouTube become a left-wing libtard echo chamber of self-reinforced stupidity and irrational social justice regurgitation? Probably. It’s almost there already.

Here are some photos from the scene:



8 Replies to “BREAKING: Active shooting at YouTube headquarters “Gun-free zone” fails yet again, mysteriously…

  1. I would lean more towrads another false flag, as what I have read and heard so far does not convince me otherwise. Number 4 would be the last choice as any person being the victim of this censorship would not use a gun and draw more attetntion and or give ammuniton to the anti gun people. Number one goes down as if they did it, I would think it would be more dramatic then this is made to be, and the body count would be higher. And last is a disgruntled employee who snapped and evil killed evil. It could be a lovers triangle, or just a relatationship gone bad, but a women going to a public place and doing this, then turning the gun on herself is suspicious and highly unlikely. I vote false flag.

  2. The article specifically fails to mention the number one way to get banned from Youtube…..ANYONE THAT QUESTIONS THE OFFICIAL STORY OF THESE ALLEGED SHOOTINGS HAS THEIR VIDEOS PULLED IMMEDIATELY. THAT’S BECAUSE ALL OF THE BS “SHOOTINGS” ARE GOVERNMENT STAGED DRILLS THAT THAT ARE “COVERED”: BY THE MSM AS BEING “REAL” EVENTS”. COMPLETE BS….THEY ARE ALL HOAXES., AND ANYONE THAT “PLAYS” ALONG WITH THE BS NARRATIVE IS JUST AS GUILTY AS THOSE THAT P[PERPETRATED THE HOAX.

  3. if it is a false flag, it will be played up in the media. if it is not a false flag, it will be downplayed. meaning no ‘marches for youtube’. likely it was a person on anti-depressants with a grudge.

  4. I learned this morning that the woman had been missing for two days and that her father had warned police SPECIFICALLY that she might be headed for You Tube. Was YT warned by police? Why not?

  5. I don’t know, Mike, but you could be in big trouble with the forces of correctness. You said “gunwoman”. Isn’t that sexist? Shouldn’t you have said gun person?

  6. i was correct. it has come out today that she had a grudge against youtube for removing her content- and that the police had talked with her mere hours before the shooting. she was an animal rights activist and a vegan. next will they declare vegans as terrorists? we already know they see animal rights activists as terrorists.

  7. as i said- the media is downplaying this- proving that it is not a false flag. the the term gunwoman is correct. this is a country with freedom of speech, meaning we need not adjust our speech to fit any half-baked idea of political correctness.

Join the conversation. Unlike most websites, we value your opinion. Leave your thoughts in the comments below.