Friday, December 30, 2016

Failed Trump Assassin Michael Sandford Trained With Omar Mateen

UPDATE: The following story turned out to be a hoax, perpetrated by the people at An interview with the reporter was attempted by a woman named Stephanie Sledge, who runs her own online news show called The Government Rag. Stephanie reported her findings in this video, which appear to be the final word on the story. Nothing more has come out of about this, but they continue to publish other political propaganda extensively. 

* * * * *


Originally posted: July 28, 2016

Information has come to light that suspected Assassin Michael Steven Sandford who recently attempted to assassinate Donald Trump at a recent Las Vegas rally, was trained by undercover FBI agents posing as Islamic terrorists, along side Omar Mateen and James Howell.

Recent information has come to light stemming from a recent Fox News Story and interview with James Wesley Howell, that links Omar Mateen, James Wesley Howell and Michael Sandford as members of a large U.S. terror organization that targets emotionally troubled young men and women to commit terrorist acts in the U.S.

Preceding the police shooting of Mateen in Orlando Florida and the arrest of Howell in Santa Monica prior to his participation in a planned attack on the Gay Pride Parade in Hollywood California, Get off the BS learned and reported that both Mateen and Howell had been recruited though an online social media course dubbed, “Fundamental Islamic Knowledge Seminary” course.

Fox News recently reported that according to FBI Director James Comey, Mateen “was a follower of a controversial gang leader-turned-bank robber Marcus Dwayne Robertson, who has been identified by the FBI and Homeland Security as a recruiter for terrorists and for his repeated acts of inciting violence.”

Although Fox News did not report a connection between Mateen, Howell and Sanford, Howell’s statements to Santa Monica Police officer’s at the time of his arrest and a recent interview at the Los Angeles County Jail with Howell and Brenda Corpian, a reporter for Get off The Bs, have brought some very disturbing facts to light.

“We were all familiar with each other through an online fundamental Islamic knowledge seminary course – we were recruited through the course and trained together at a camp in Virginia – we were taught how to shoot and make bombs – everyone knew their part – something went wrong….”, said Howell at the time of his arrest in Santa Monica, CA.

Interview with Howell at LACJ

When interviewed at the LACJ (Los Angeles County Jail) by our staff attorney an investigative reporter, Brenda Corpian, Howell further elaborated on his original statements. Brenda was allowed to speak with Howell as a licensed attorney considering representing him.

Brenda: You originally mentioned three other people you went thought training with. However you only mentioned the names of two of the people you trained with. Do you now remember who the third person was?

Howell: “Your guy got that f@#$%d-up. I told the cops what I knew –I trained with four other people – not three. We were part of one group – there were at lest 8 groups that we seen – maybe more.”

Brenda: Do you know what kind of activities these other groups were being trained for?

Howell: “I don’t know. Probably the same s@#t we were learning – I mean, we sometimes trained together on some stuff.”

Brenda: What kind of training did you receive at the camp – what did you train with others to do?

Howell: “The usual stuff I guess – making pipe bombs, mixing chemical explosives – ya know, military s@*t.”

Brenda: James, could you be more specific – what do you mean by military (expletive)– were you ever in the military?

Howell: “No I never made that trip but I have seen a lot of deep s*%t. I think everyone had his or her own thing going on. They taught several of us how to shoot – others were taught how to blow s**t up. All of us had to take our turns in the gas room….”

Brenda: The gas room?

Howell: “Yeah, it was really f@#$%d up. We had to go in to this room with gas masks on and take them off after they shot the gas in – it was jacked up.”

It appears that Howell and others he was trained with went through an abbreviated version of what the Army dubs basic training. Additionally it appears that selective training was given to others for specific assignments.

Howell and Omar were trained to handle automatic weapons and explosives. Howell witnessed at least five other people being trained to shoot what Howell described as “long rifles” – most likely sniper rifles.

Howell Identifies Sandford – Suspect In Assassination of Donald Trump In Las Vegas NV.

“We all called Dan the chemist. He seemed to get off to making bombs and setting things on fire….I remember a time one his firecrackers came within inches of blowing some ball bearings through Michael’s legs….man that Brit was pissed,” said Howell.

Brenda: Brit? Who is Michael?

Howell: “The guy in Vegas. Weird mother f@$%%r – we called him the Brit because he was from England or some place like that…we went and partied one night with him….he has a nice Beamer.”

Brenda: I am not sure I understand what you mean by ‘the guy in Vegas?’ Beamer—do you mean BMW?

Howell: “The guy they arrested for trying to grab that cops gun to shoot Trump with — yeah a BMW – you know – beamer. I am in to lowered Honda’s and Acura’s. I have a sweet ride. If I ever get out of here maybe we can go for a …..”

Howell definitely made it clear while he was talking to Brenda that he knew Michael Sandford – recently arrested at a Trump rally for trying to disarm a Las Vegas metropolitan Police officer – a gun Sandford later claimed to the U.S. Secret Service he would have used to shoot Donald Trump.

Brenda reported that during the time she talked to Howell he seemed scared one moment and at other moments he was flirting with her. It was obvious to Brenda that Howell was very scared of what might happen to him while in custody but tried to add levity to the conversation to appear somewhat tough.

Brenda wrote in her story that, “I doubt very seriously that the recent reports that Howell is bi-sexual are accurate. The whole time I talked to him his eyes were glued to my breasts–he made no attempt to hide the fact that he was turned on by my chest.”

FBI / Homeland Security Partner With A Radial Islamic Terrorist

According to Howell, he first came in contact with Imam Abu Taubah, AKA Marcus Robertson, a former marine who is the leader of what Howell believed was an ISIS cell group training and operating in the U.S.

Howell, Mateeen and Sandford were allegedly recruited by Robertson through an online fundamental Islamic knowledge seminary course, which Robertson conducts.

“I had no idea that the CIA was involved until I arrived at the camp in Virginia with others to start our training….I have read about places like the camp…but it was not what I was expecting….I don’t think anyone else was expecting it either,” said Howell.

Howell was unsure of exactly how many people were at the camp with him and or what particular missions, if any, the other recruits were being trained for. “People came in and out. Omar, Dan and me were always together—we knew what we were suppose to do.”

It appears Howell and his fellow conspirators were told very clearly to “keep their mouths shut” about what they were going to do and to not ask others about their assignments – roles, if any.

Brenda’s interview came to an end when someone at the jail abruptly shut off the phones Howell and her were speaking through.

Although it is normal procedure for a client (Howell) and their attorney (Brenda) to talk in privacy in an interview room, the authorities despite Brenda’s license to practice law in California, would not allow Brenda to speak with Howell in an attorney/client interview room.

Additionally, the phone interview should not of been monitored, which is obvious it was because after Howell had already described two people and was half way through naming the last name of a third person, the phone system was shut down and Brenda was rudely escorted out of the building.

Senator, Former Clinton Aide and a High Ranking Federal Law Enforcement Agent Have Regularly Met With Robertson

Brenda: You have mentioned Dan, Omar and Michael – did you recognize anyone else that you may have known previously or seen on TV or read about?

Howell: “They often meet with Abu. They seemed especially interested in Michael. The Senator was often accompanied by a woman who I have seen on television hundreds of times, she doesn’twork for the government anymore but I think her husband does……yeah her name is Hu…”end of interview.

According to Brenda’s report, Howell claims that Robertson was seen several times meeting with a current US Senator, a high ranking member of Homeland Security and was releasing the name of a woman that we have a good idea of her identity from his description of her and what was heard of her name before the interview was abruptly ended.

Frankly, both Brenda and I are not completely convinced that Howell was completely honest with her during her interview with him. However, many things that Howell said are consistent with the recent Fox report concerning Robertson and a 365 USA News report concerning some very strange recruitment activities that are being done by the FBI according to FBI Director James Comey.

However, we are completely convinced that Howell definitely knows Sandford because at the time of her interview with Howell, he mentioned several pieces of information that included specific information concerning the vehicle Sandford drove to Las Vegas which had not yet been reported before Brenda’s interview with Howell.

Brenda was concerned that Howell may have embellished part of his story to impress her.

This Story Has Been Partially Revealed By Mainstream Media Sources on Numerous Occasions Since 2013

We are not the first news source to reveal the questionable activities of Robertson and the FBI. The Fox News article raised a good question as to why Robertson was released from prison early when in fact he was previously identified by the FBI and Homeland Security as a “Radical Islam” known to recruit other like-minded individuals.

Additionally, Fox News raised the question of why did Mateen who had been recruited by a fake terrorist group of under cover FBI agents, be let off their hook ten months after he was recruited.

A recent U.S. 365 News article includes an affidavit from a former undercover FBI agent that was verified accurate by James Comey, addresses the FBI’s activities of pretending to be radical terrorists who recruit people they believe have radical Islamic beliefs, arming them with guns and explosives, and later busting them prior to their carrying out the missions the undercover operatives assigned them.

Please also consider the first mentioning of the FBI’s suspected initial involvement and later ignoring of young terrorists living in the USA, who later committed an act of terror, was first revealed in April of 2013, shortly after the terrorist attack on the Boston Marathon.

The most disturbing part of the former undercover FBI operatives and James Comey’s story is that there have never been any reported stories about the alleged arrests of anybody they have baited in to their traps.

Although, it is reasonable to assume any alleged arrests were most likely kept quiet due to the FBI not wanting future targets to be aware of their ongoing undercover sting operations.

If in fact Howell had been trained alongside Mateen and Sanford as he alleged, by under cover agents working for the FBI, why were at least five people involved in the Orlando shooting, the failed attempt of killing Gay Pride parade attendees and the attempt to assassinate Donald Trump, released from the undercover FBI’s terrorist trap?

Additionally, what are the missions of at least 100 other young radicals that Howell claims he seen training along side him at what he was told is a CIA training camp in Virginia?

The FBI’s story about using undercover agents to pose as radical Islamic terrorists to draw in and bust suspected terrorists sounds plausible on the surface, but unravels quickly when the FBI nor Homeland Security has offered any rational reason why they let Mateen and others who they have claimed their traps snared, out of their control.

On three separate occasions now, although reported by the news and authorities as unrelated, at least three individuals trained by under cover agents for the FBI have committed terrorist acts in the U.S.

Authors Notes:

Folks we are a small blog with an audience of about 48,000 regular visitors a day. Our group is comprised of college-educated individuals, two with licenses to practice law and one who can practice both medicine and law.

A former source of ours assisting us with an article we previously released about Ted Cruz, died under suspicious circumstances in Indiana, three days after releasing a story on his own blog, where he wrote that if his “story was correct” he would most likely “disappear or be found dead.”

Brenda Corpian was found beaten within an inch of her life and left to die in a dumpster 15 hours after her interview with Howell. She is currently heavily guarded by our private security in a hospital ICU with a poor prognosis for recovery.

We believe that she was beaten and disposed of in a trash dumpster (presumably dead by the hands of her assailants) because of her knowledge of the names Howell revealed to her during his interview.

None of us earn any money and or compensation whatsoever from our efforts to promote Donald J. Trump. Our website does not contain any paid advertising on it nor paid affiliate links to other sites with paid advertising.

We do not ask for and or accept donations.

Although we receive hundreds of tips daily with information that is often newsworthy, we rarely ever use any information that does not come from mainstream media sources or from sources that we cannot verify the reliability of the information from.

We will not publish the names Howell revealed to Brenda. The people who Howell identified, especially the woman, are tied to literally hundreds of questionable deaths and suspicious disappearances of people who had associations with them.

If you are a journalist whose identity can be verified as working for a mainstream media source, please contact us for additional information concerning this story.

However disturbing what we have published in this article may be, what we have omitted may be the biggest cover-up concerning government sponsored terror in this country. May God protect us all from the Obama administration.

Notice: for those trying to vet this story, please be advised the name Brenda Corpian and the name of others used to promote this website, our fictitious names.

Sunday, December 25, 2016

Signs of Life: Krystle Campbell is Krystle Muise

The following research was inspired by the earlier research done in this LiveLeaks video, which attempts to show that Krystle Campbell, who was allegedly killed in the Boston marathon bombing, is still alive. This earlier research was done soon after the event, and much of the evidence that's shown there has since been scrubbed from the internet, so I decided to see what I might be able to dig up on her today, over 3 years later, to see if there are still signs that she's alive.

The LiveLeaks video shows that Krystle Campbelll had worked for AEW Capital Management, LP, as well as at Deloitte, LLP, and that she had gone to Northeastern University. Here's a screenshot of the video showing a public records search listing for Krystle Campbell that lists her working there:

We know that this is the right person because it also lists her parents, Patricia and William Campbell. We also know that her middle name is Marie.

Note: AEW Capital Management is an international real estate investment company, which means that it manages properties for absent landlords, among other things. Krystle Campbell was allegedly the manager of a restaurant called Jasper White's Summer Shack in Boston, which could have been one of their assets. She had allegedly left there to work at another restaurant called Jimmy's Steer House in Arlington, which might be one of their assets as well. At this point, I can find no public records for these two businesses.

I decided to begin my research by looking for other LinkedIn accounts that might be associated with Krystle Campbell, and soon came across a listing for someone named Krystle Muise, who also lives in Boston and also works at AEW Capital Management, LP:

It looks like the same person with all the same criteria, but with a different last name. I still wasn't satisfied, so I ran the name through Google and found a facebook account for a Krystle Muise who also uses the name Krystle Campbell:

I also found one Whitepage listing for a Krystle Muise in the Boston/Gloucester area who also goes by the name Krystle Jean Campbell.

Krystle Jean Campbell is probably the Krystle J. Campbell listed here:

The Google search for Krystle Muise also came up with a link to this wedding announcement:

Here we have a direct link between Krystle Campbell and someone named Kevin Muise, which would explain the change of name to Krystle Muise. Gloucester is just north of Boston and comes up in many of the public records listings for Krystle Campbell. Note that the date of the wedding is just a few weeks after Krystle's alleged death... Perfect timing for faking her death and changing her name. There are no other online postings announcing this wedding.

Here's an obituary I came across for Kevin's father, who died on July 15, 2013. Note that it doesn't mention that Kevin and Krystle have a daughter, but it does tell us that Kevin has a sister named Lauren.

This later obituary from January 2015 tells us that Kevin and Krystle now have (or are expecting) a daughter named Lauren:

Here's their baby registry for an expected birth on July 24, 2015:

If Krystle already knew she was pregnant with a baby girl in January of 2015 when Kevin's father died, then this all makes sense. The child would be a year and a half old by now, which is about the age of the child in the photos on Krystle Muise's facebook page.

I also checked if there was a Krystle Muise who had graduated from Northeastern University, and found this confirmation:

On the other hand, Krystle Camp
bell's background information offers no leads that can be checked. 

While I was searching, I also spotted this:

Apparently, Kevin Muise is a Gloucester police officer. The link doesn't show the text we see in the listing header, but another search came up with a number of news articles about an incident in Gloucester where a police officer named Kevin Muise was the alleged victim of a head-on collision with a drunk driver, causing Muise serious injuries. I'll bet it did. He's somewhere in the photo on this next page, which was taken back in September, 2011. This is probably when he first entered the police force:

I also came across a few fundraising websites linked to Krystle Muise. Fundraising appears to be one of the defining activities of many of these crisis actor/victims. Here's Krystle listed on a results chart for a fundraising run that she took part in on May 17, 2015:

From all of this research, we can be pretty certain that all of the following names are tied to the same person, and are being used to bury her real identity from anyone who might go looking for her:

Kristie Camp
Krystle Campbell
Krystle M. Campbell
Krystle Marie Campbell
Krystle Muise
Krystle J. Campbell
Krystle Jean Campbell
Alicia Campbell
Alicia M. Campbell

Sunday, December 4, 2016

YOU HAVE BEEN BANNED! Another Shill Site Discovered

I signed up to this site just the other day. I was doing some research on the Columbine shooting and saw that it had many active forums, so I was hoping to discuss with people. I don't get a lot of chances to do that with serious researchers, and this place claimed to be a site where researchers are welcome. 

After I signed on I started reading posts and responding to a few. Nothing much... Just asking a few questions about details of the Columbine shooting and giving a bit of information where I could. 

I saw that they also had forums for other shootings, including Sandy Hook. So I went into the Sandy Hook forum and started reading posts there. The thread I was reading was titled "Sandy Hook - No Proof". It was the only one that appeared to be conspiracy-related. The person who started the thread was asking for proof that Sandy Hook was a real shooting, and pretty much everybody else was attacking him, and not being very nice at all. So I decided to respond to a few of them, not being nasty or anything, but just questioning their own posts and their motives for attacking this person. They had also said something about conspiracy theorists all being stupid, so I let it be known that I was a conspiracy theorist, and I said a few things like I typically do to defend my position. Again, I said nothing rude or out of hand. 

Then I got into a discussion in that same thread with one of the other members about something else. One of the mods (Jenn) had apparently had a hand in discovering some online posts by Adam Lanza a while back (the Smiggles posts), and these were supposed to conclusively prove (according to the discoverers) that Lanza was a real person. 

So I started asking some questions about them because I don't just take someone's word about something like that any more. I wanted to investigate further to assure myself that there wasn't any possibility that these posts weren't planted there on purpose by someone else, or created after the shooting, or whatever else. I was simply asking questions, but I seem to have gotten someone pissed off, because now I'm banned and can't even view the site.

What would be the reason to not only ban me, but also block me from the site altogether? That's overkill, unless they have something to hide from me. Being unable to view the site, I can't easily research the people that run it or see what they're really up to on there. 

My suspicions were already being raised when I was first reading posts on the site. The nasty attitudes of the most active members towards anything conspiracy related were one thing, but then I got a subtle warning from the person I was corresponding with in the form of an accusation that I was calling the mod a liar. I pointed out that I wasn't calling anyone anything and was just trying to assure myself that there was no way that these posts could have been planted or created on purpose. 

Throughout my discussion, I had been explaining what I knew about psychological operations, what I knew about how these staged events are orchestrated, how agents and informants are planted online to act in various capacities in these orchestrated events, the discovery of Homeland Security's HSEEP program and how these emergency drills are incorporated into the event as a cover, how crisis actors are used and the companies that contract them for these drills , etc. 

Basically, I let it be known to any government agents that might be on that site that I was very aware of how they operate. 

And now here I am, banned and blocked.

I believe that  is a government site, like so many others out there these days. I'll add it to the list of sites I've been banned from for no apparent reason other than I talked about government conspiracy theories. 

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

Kaczynski, SSRIs, and the System

Ted Kaczynski allegedly stated in his manifesto:

"[O]ur society tends to regard as 'sickness' any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a 'cure' for a 'sickness' and therefore as good."

And isn't this EXACTLY what is going on today? The correction of 'abherent' thoughts through the diagnosis and treatment of something so general and hard to define but nonetheless given a blanket name like 'schizophrenia' to make it seem like it's something substantively defineable, and therefore diagnoseable.

How many SSRI drugs are out there today that can cause abherent thoughts and actions in the patient? Look at the long lists of side effects that these drugs have, which just get longer with each new drug that comes out. Why do you think they advertise them on TV, and then list these many dangerous side effects? The most logical reason is because no doctor wants to be sued for prescribing them, and neither do the pharmaceutical companies who make them, so it must fall on the patient to take responsibility for how the drugs might affect them. This is undoubtedly why many of them are also now over-the-counter drugs, rather than prescription only. But they're nonetheless very DANGEROUS! They create psychotic monsters! The world is more full of people taking these questionable drugs than ever before, and that means that the likelihood of someone going off the deep end is only increasing because of them. THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT! This is why there are so many instances these days of lone-nut shooters going into schools and churches and malls and shooting everyone up! Just do a search online for mass shootings and SSRIs, and you'll find not just a few cases where these drugs were involved, but many 100s, and increasing steadily with each passing year!

Drugs are a form of technology, so Kaczynski was as right in this instance about how technology is overtaking society as he was about any other technology he might have been referring to. And aren't we being encouraged - very often even forced - to turn to drugs as 'cures' for every perceived ailment, more and more? Are they not attempting to classify every perceived 'sickness' of the mind and correlate them with brain activity so that they can just plug you up to a machine that will spit out a diagnosis, and that diagnosis must stand as fact because their machines don't make mistakes? Do you think they would ever be willing to explain how such a machine works? Do you think they will even know after a while? Who comes to be in charge of THAT knowledge? A pimply-faced computer programmer? Compartmentalization of knowledge and secrecy based on proprietary information will only add to the problems we'll face more and more in the future. And that's the way we're giong. But they don't really care. They just want to be able to label people in order to justify what they do to them after that.

The system that the manifesto talks about is likened to a machine. It has no brain, no heart, no senses. It does not acknowledge the human condition beyond what it's programmed to understand. It works towards one end, and that is to enslave humankind to itself. That is how it's programmed. The laws we live by are part of the programming, and we must adhere to those laws in order that the machine will work effectively in its task to keep us enslaved. The fact that we keep having more rights and freedoms taken away from us is based on how the machine must operate, not on how humans operate. We are being forced to become something other than what God made us. That is a requirement of the system, if the system is going to move forward with its intended purpose. The system comes first, and individuals come last. That's how it's programmed.

The fact is, Kaczynski was labelled as mentally ill based on the manifesto, which his State-appointed DEFENSE team (who were screwing him over) claimed was a sign that he was paranoid, as though very well-reasoned fear or aprehension are somehow equated with mental illness. If that's the case, then this write-up and most of my other blog articles qualify me as mentally ill, as are many other people who post their thoughts online. And that's exactly how they want it to be. We become easy targets ourselves if we accept this blatant labelling of people with very generalized mental illnesses like schizophrenia.

The evidence of sickness they used with Ted is the same sort of evidence they will use on others. He had vocalized his well-reasoned thoughts in a paper that many first said was pure genius for its deep insight, but then they were overrun with louder and more 'authoritative' claims that he was paranoid, and therefore schizophrenic, and therefore a madman. Case closed.

So I must be a madman too. And so are you if you happen to agree with any of this. At least we'll have each other for company in that rubber room.

* * *

Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber

Saturday, November 5, 2016

Staged Terror: Research Notes

This document and related pages are under constant construction. These notes are not fully organized and a lot (99.8%) of pertinent information on individual cases I would like to include is still missing. Additions will be made continuously as I work on this project.

Please take the time to click on the highlighted text, which will take you to other pages of research material that aren't accessible from the main blog index. There are various areas of research that I want to get into that deserve their own pages, and I'm still trying to organize my work into various topics that deserve their own sections. 
[T]he utilization of barbaric acts of mass-terror-murder by governments in order to manipulate political objectives is hardly new. Deliberately manipulated outrage-incidents such as the sinking of the Lusitania, the burning of the Reischtag, and the attack on Pearl Harbor, as precursors to elite-planned military campaigns has historically held several functions: it triggers the built-in nationalistic war spirit, channels the resulting righteous wrath toward the nominated enemy, and concentrates power in the executive branch, where elite control is unhampered by popular influence. – David Hoffman, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror
[E]very year or two, some major monster is constructed that we have to defend ourselves against. There used to be one that was always available: the Russians. But they're losing their attractiveness as an enemy, and it's getting harder and harder to use that one, so some new ones have to be conjured up… They've got to keep coming up, one after another. You frighten the population, terrorize them, intimidate them.… That's one of the ways in which you can keep the bewildered herd from paying attention to what's really going on around them, keep them diverted and controlled. – Noam Chomsky

This document researches terror events and the possible complicity of government agencies in their planning and execution.

Some terror events that are discussed in this document:

- OKC bombing (April 19, 1995)
- Columbine shooting (April 20, 1999)
- 9/11 (Sept. 11, 2001)
- Aurora shooting (July 20, 2012)
- Sandy Hook shooting (Dec. 14, 2012)
- Boston bombing (April 15, 2013)
- Orlando shooting (June 12, 2016)

A comparison of these events shows us:

- some of the weaknesses of earlier events
- how later changes have made these events more resilient to discovery of a staging
- how later changes have made these events less violent and criminal
- how Hollywood theatrics and scripted media presentations are used to do this

More particularly:

- events that involve real violence (i.e. OKC, Columbine. 9/11) pose more risks and leave many loose ends that must be dealt with, sometimes for a long time afterwards
- small events in controlled environments (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Orlando) require less planning and preparation and allow for greater control of the evidence and the people involved
- theatrics and scripted media bites allow for better control of the narrative and assure that what will be seen and heard by the public is convincing
- virtually all aspects of an event can be prepared in advance and staged at the most opportune place and time for the best results

Stage 1: Planning and Preparation


Every event has a primary objective. It can be:

- To promote a certain agenda
- To eliminate a perceived enemy
- To justify a war
- To distract from other issues or events taking place
- To create discord and division among the population

The primary objective is typically one of three types:

- False Flag
- Sting
- Assassination

The type of operation determines what sort of scenario will be used to fulfill the objective. Each type serves a different purpose and is successively more complex and riskier.


False flag events will have a predetermined storyline that explains the who, what, when, where, why, and how of it all. The storyline will typically involve a perpetrator who engages in an act of violence against a group of people at a given location. Further details will be built into the story in a way that gives it more plausibility. These details will include the place of the attack, the history and character of the perpetrator, the weapon(s) used, the number who will ‘die’ or be ‘wounded’, who the victims and witnesses will be who will give statements and what statements they will make, how the perpetrator will be stopped, etc. Some of these details will be real while others will be purely fictional. It’s quite possible for a false flag event to be a completely fictional story with no actual event or people involved, where just news reports are used to coerce an audience to respond in a certain way and achieve the objective sought, but since the whole purpose of acting out the event is to add enough realism to make the story more powerfully convincing, there will almost always be a staged event to go with the story, with real people who play the roles of perpetrators, victims, and witnesses.

The storyline will describe:

- Location of attack
- Type of attack
- People attacked
- Motive for attack
- Damage inflicted

A script will be developed around these five basic elements of the story. The script will include further details of the storyline as the scenes are written and roles are established. Whatever props will be used will also be determined during this phase.

The specific time and date of the event will usually only need to be known during the script-writing phase if there’s another event that it will coincide with. Otherwise, a script can be written that isn’t dependent on the event occurring at a particular time and date, although it should be noted that the date might be chosen for its symbolic nature, as is often the case (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11). Timing will be dependent on how effective it will be on achieving the desired objective, more than anything else. Events might be staged late at night in order to delay public knowledge and avoid large crowds of onlookers (i.e. Orlando), or they might be staged during the day in a heavily populated area in order to maximize public attention to the event (i.e. Boston). 


The location for the event will depend on the storyline. The type of attack, the people targeted, and the motive for targeting them will all have some bearing on the selection of a location as well. A general location (i.e. school, shopping mall, nightclub, etc.) can be determined for the storyline while a more specific location might be not be decided until much later on.

The selected site has to be able to be easily secured from non-participants during the event. Closed off/private areas might involve the cooperation of the owner/leaser, while open/public areas require a means of setting the stage and getting actors and props in place without arousing attention, so how these preparations will be disguised as normal activity must be planned out.

- The Sandy Hook and Orlando events took place in buildings where there would be no non-participants to witness anything.

- The Boston event took place in a public area that was strategically blocked from view by the fencing and scaffolding, and easy to secure from non-participants.


Emergency Medical Services
Government agencies
Casting companies

The event is typically treated as an exercise drill, wherein most of the police, emergency medical services, hospital staff, etc. who will be involved will only be involved after the fact. These parties can be expected to follow whatever protocols are already in place for emergency drills, so that only a few people at the supervisory levels need to be involved in any planning and preparations for an event.

Various federal- and/or state-level government agencies will normally be involved in overseeing the planning and execution of the various aspects of the event. For instance, it’s not unusual for the FBI, ATF, FEMA, DHS, DOJ, DOD, etc. to be involved.

Casting companies are typically used to supply trained crisis actors to act as perpetrators, victims, and witnesses. These companies won’t necessarily require any prior knowledge of the event beyond the fact that it will be a crisis simulation, and will merely supply people who are trained in crisis simulation and who have the necessary security clearances in place.

The media’s full cooperation will be required to assure that news of the event is quickly spread far and wide and to the right audiences. For this reason it’s likely that certain people working within various media outlets will have foreknowledge of the event.

Fundraising companies will be used to raise donations for victims and victim’s families immediately after the event. Very often, fundraising campaigns are started before the dust has even settled, suggesting that these companies are more deeply involved.


Traditionally, false flag events have involved real violence against real people to achieve the necessary objective, but this has proven to be extremely risky, since the chances of being found out could lead to justified retaliation when it’s against another country, or to serious criminal charges if it’s conducted on home soil.

More recently, theatrics have begun to be incorporated into these operations in order to avoid these risks. The logic of this is quite simple: the intended audience only needs to think that an attack occurred in order to get them to respond in the desired way. The actual violence can be staged, and actors can be used instead of real people.

Actors might be used as:

- Victims
- Witnesses
- Perpetrator(s)

Of course, there are variations on how an event might be staged, and sometimes non-actors might be involved, and real violence might be used, depending on the situation. If they can be avoided they probably will be, but sometimes there’s a reason to incorporate them.

Acting Participants

There might be any number of acting participants involved in an event, filling the roles of victims and witnesses. There might also be participants who are unwittingly involved and who perceive the staging as real, but it’s far more likely these days that every person involved in an event is an actor playing a role. An exception here might be where the perpetrator is being set up in a sting, in which case he might be the only unwitting participant. All of this depends largely on the level of sophistication of the staging, where a more sophisticated one will typically incorporate fewer actors and more unwitting participants in order to capture the realism of the event.

Acting participants will obviously know that the event is staged, so they’ll be handled differently than unwitting participants. All actors will be made to sign a non-disclosure agreement prior to receiving any information about what they will be involved in, in order to assure that security will be maintained and the true nature of the event isn’t discovered. For this reason, some actors might be drawn from the military or government agencies where they already have security clearances.

Actors will be selected to fill the scripted roles once those roles have been determined during storyline development. It’s possible that back-up actors and lookalikes will also be selected in case of problems, and these back-ups can otherwise be used as extras to fill the scene.

Actors who can cry on demand or maintain the appearance of emotional distress will be particularly useful in post-event news clips and interviews.

Young adults are often used as acting participants, which makes it more difficult for researchers or investigators to check their identities.

Amputees might be specifically used as victims where extreme violence is to be portrayed (i.e. Boston). These actors can be provided with special prosthetics that look like freshly lost limbs, which will have maximum shock effect.

Lookalikes are often used in these operations for any number of reasons. One reason might be to create false witness evidence that places a target at a certain location at a certain time. In other cases, they might be used to confuse witness reports, or to act as temporary stand-ins for a non-existent person.


Each actor is assigned a role and given a script to follow. The script details their part in the event -- what they witnessed, how and where they were hurt, etc. Scripts will typically be kept very simple in order to avoid mistakes. Actors who are to receive extensive media attention during the post-event stage will need to be more carefully selected and prepared.

Personal Histories

Each actor will need to have an identity, whether their own or a made up one, as well as some semblance of a personal history to give plausibility to the claim that they are who they say they are. For this purpose, accounts are sometimes created on popular social media websites at some point before the event, and other biographical information might be scattered around on a few other sites as well, but this will usually be very limited in informative content in order to protect the actor and reduce traceability. The drawback of creating online accounts is that they have to be maintained for as long as the deception is to continue. It’s therefore safer and easier if actors don’t have an active online presence at all, even if it looks suspicious.

Unwitting Participants

In some cases, unwitting participants will be involved in the event to some degree. Apart from those organizations mentioned previously that might become aware that the event is staged only after they’re called into action, other participants might become involved because they just happen to be present, but they don’t know that the event is staged. These people will primarily be used as witnesses in order that their stories reflect a realism that actors may not be able to pull off so convincingly. For this reason, they will need to be carefully controlled during the event, so that they only see or hear what they’re intended to, and nothing else. These people will unwittingly help by adding a sense of realism to the narrative through interviews and statements. It’s obviously quite risky to use unwitting participants since they could do something unexpected, so their use will likely be limited to that of witnesses.

Sometimes unwitting participants might be used as real victims, in order to affect even greater realism. This of course requires that real violence occurs, which increases the risks involved.

Nonexistent Participants

Nonexistent participants primarily include the dead and wounded that don’t really exist beyond the personal histories that have been created for them. Sometimes these nonexistent participants will require actors to pose as family members. These actors can be handled similarly to other acting participants.

Nonexistent participants can also be witnesses, anonymous police sources, etc. Anywhere where it’s necessary to introduce some information while maintaining plausible deniability, a nonexistent participant can be created to fill the role.

The Perpetrator(s)

The perpetrator(s) may or may not be an actor, and this is an important point to consider when trying to determine the true nature of an event. Often, a real person is being targeted for arrest or elimination, such as in a sting operation where the FBI sets up a potential terrorist and allows him to go so far as to act out his plans, but in a carefully controlled environment. It’s not known for certain if any perpetrators in past false flag events were actors or not, since they’re immediately isolated from the public after the event (if they survive) and there’s no way to check the official story that’s given about them. In many past false flag events, the perpetrators may have been completely fictitious people.

In cases where the perpetrator is a real person who isn’t an actor, he might actually be wittingly involved in the event, or he might be present but not wittingly involved (directed there for some other fictitious reason), or he might not even be present at all.

In some cases, it’s possible that the perpetrator is under some form of mind-control, or isn’t acting entirely under his own free will. In these cases he might be placed at the scene but not actually take part in the event, or he might appear to take part but not really understand what’s going on. These cases are usually either sting operations, or more likely, the perpetrator is being used as a patsy and someone else is the real perpetrator (where there’s any real violence involved).

Whether or not the perpetrator actually exists, a history will need to be pre-established for him that will be used to explain his activities leading up to the event, in order to establish a motive and character profile. Planted evidence might also be used in this capacity, as well as look-alikes.

Often, the perpetrator will have spent some time in the military, usually having received an early discharge, or they come from a military family. A history of mental illness is also common.


The timing of the event might be chosen for any number of reasons. Usually it will be selected for the event to have maximum effect in achieving the objective. It will often be chosen to occur around the same time as another event, based on its primary objective.

Some other possibilities are:

- late night/early morning to avoid non-participants
- early morning to dominate the day’s headlines
- to distract from another breaking news event
- to maximize the shock value
- to get the attention of a particular audience
- to target a particular group or person
- symbolic date

The time and date of the event might be selected long before the event takes place, or it might be selected at the very last minute. The more serious the consequences of the event are expected to be, the more planning will likely be involved, and the more likely a planned time and date will be significant to its success (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11, Boston). On the other hand, some events are planned out so that there’s a great deal of flexibility in when they might be executed (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Orlando), in which case the time and date of execution are far less important. 

Stage 2: The Event

Once everything has been planned and prepared, and the date and time have arrived, the event begins.


Training drills often run in parallel to false flag events in order to provide cover by confusing the events. The exact time and place of the drill varies, but it will usually be very close to that of the staged event, sometimes taking place throughout the days or weeks that the staged event occurs, and at a nearby location.

Very often, the drill will follow the exact same storyline as the staged event (i.e. OKC, 9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston), which helps to confuse things further.

Some reasons for using a drill as cover:

- In the case that someone sees something they shouldn’t have, it can be made to appear to be part of the drill.
- In the case that something goes wrong and the staged event needs to be aborted, it can appear to be part of the drill.
- To confuse the two events so that responding police, EMS, hospital employees, etc. who aren’t in on the false flag event will think that they’re responding to an ongoing drill and don’t know that the parallel event wasn’t real either.
- To slow down, distract, or remove key personnel from the scene of the staged event who aren’t in on it.

Sometimes a drill will go ‘live’, in which case a real perpetrator allegedly opens fire during an otherwise safe drill. In these cases, it appears that a sting operation is in progress, since it would otherwise make no sense that a real perpetrator with real weapons would be involved in the drill.

Sometimes a real drill with an identical scenario will take place days or weeks before the staged event, and this might serve as a rehearsal or preliminary staging, where photographs and film footage, witness/victim interviews, etc. can be created for use as part of the later event. This offers some obvious advantages, in that much of the material that will be used to convince the public of a real event can be more carefully prepared prior to its staging, reducing the chances of mistakes. Close analysis of photos and other evidence sometimes reveals that they couldn’t have come from the event they’re attributed to, revealing that deception is taking place.

In some cases, the staged event will be preceded by announcements that a drill is about to take place. These announcements are usually directed at the police and emergency services that will be responding to the drill, but they also act as a signal to witting parties that the staged event is about to go down.

(Interestingly, these training drills appear to be increasing in frequency in response to the fear raised by these false flag events, effectively making the staged events easier to cover up.)


The staging begins with the location first being secured from non-participants and the actors taking their places. The perpetrator then enters the scene and acts out the attack and the actors respond with their scripted actions.

Victim actors who will be observed with wounds will either have moulage applied prior to the staging, during the event, or immediately after.

If the perpetrator is an unwitting patsy, his elimination or capture will usually occur during the event or soon after, even though he isn’t necessarily involved in the actual event at all. A look-alike might be used, or his actual participation might just be a fabrication, even though he’s a real person.


Immediately after the perpetrator has acted out the attack, the police are signaled to respond. If the first-responders aren’t aware that it’s a staged event or think it’s a drill, their lack of foreknowledge could lead to innocent people being harmed. Therefore the first-responders will likely already be aware that it’s a staged event, or they will be notified of this as soon as they arrive. First-responders are very likely in on the deception, and arrive first in order to manage the situation and make sure that unwitting responders don’t realize it’s a staged event.

Only after the police have arrived and taken control of the scene will any other emergency services be called in, and from then on routine procedures will be followed, whether it’s treated as a real event or as a training drill.


Media activity will usually begin soon after the police and other emergency services begin to respond. In order to control how the narrative unfolds, local media might be kept far away from the scene of the event and forced to rely on police reports and witness interviews as they become available. National news outlets will pick up the story immediately and spread it far and wide. These national news outlets will be used to carry the main narrative, so there will likely be some collusion between the orchestrators and key media personnel.

Stage 3: Post-Event Activity

The FBI will usually take over the case immediately after the event. They will usually be responsible for identifying/capturing the perpetrator and solving the case. The capture will almost always be swift, occurring within days of the event. The FBI’s case will at first appear to be founded on irrefutable evidence, but closer scrutiny will usually reveal that there are many problems with it. This is the point at which ‘facts’ must be established that will support the official story, while anything that doesn’t fit with the official story and puts it into question must be made to appear irrelevant or nonsensical. 


As soon as the event begins to unfold and the police are on the scene, the media is brought into play. They will typically respond when the first calls to 911 are made, making the initial news announcements to alert the public. National news agencies will quickly pick up the story and keep it alive with constant updates as new pieces of information come in.

News stories will serve a number of purposes:

- To drive the desired narrative
- To set the desired attitudes and opinions
- To deal with undesirable attitudes and opinions
- To add inconsistencies
- To explain away inconsistencies
- To demonize the perpetrator
- To promote the desired objective

The narrative will usually change as time goes on and inconsistencies begin to emerge. This is the point at which the orchestrators will begin to micromanage the situation, introducing new information to direct the focus of attention, adjusting scripts to make them consistent, eliminating problem information by providing plausible explanations, etc.

Misinformation will often be purposely injected into the narrative in order to confuse and mislead anyone who might suspect that it’s a staged event. Usually, this misinformation will be introduced by witnesses and victims to allow for plausible deniability, or if it comes from an authoritative body, the identity of the person(s) giving it will remain anonymous. News writers might also introduce various opinions and ideas as facts through deceptive wording.

In order to control information, the active participants in the event who will be known to the public will need to be handled carefully to make sure that they stick to their scripts and don’t say or do anything unexpected. Normally, this won’t be a problem, since they will have signed NDAs and will be fully aware of the consequences of breaking those agreements. Unwitting participants pose more of a threat because they won’t have signed an NDA and might see or hear something that they aren’t supposed to, so they will need to be monitored very carefully as well, although from a greater distance so as not to arouse their suspicion. If they do make a statement to the press or anyone else that throws the official story into serious question, then efforts at damage control will be initiated to re-establish the ‘facts’. In severe cases, these people might even be eliminated by staging an accident, murder, or suicide.


A body of evidence that supports the official story will need to be presented in order to make the staging appear to be legitimate. This evidence will primarily consist of words and images presented by the media and little else, so it’s quite easy to present whatever story the orchestrators choose, and create the evidence to support it.

Evidence handling includes:

- Creation of evidence
- Suppression of evidence
- Tampering with evidence
- Dealing with inconsistencies
- Early destruction/disposal of evidence

Much of the preliminary evidence will come from victim and witness statements, which are less reliable than official police reports, so these will offer a means to introduce confusing information or to change the narrative over time to suit the need.

Most or all physical evidence of the event will be suppressed from the public, aside from a few staged images presented by the media, and some footage of police activity at the scene of the crime. There will be just enough to make it appear that the event occurred.

Evidence that the victims and witnesses are real people will mostly only be available through online searches, so online personal histories will usually be created for actor’s roles and nonexistent victims sometime before the event, but these tend to have minimal content and aren’t usually kept very active. However, this isn’t always the case, and some key participants in these events maintain their roles for years afterwards (i.e. Jeff Bauman of Boston).

In cases where there is no real violence (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston, Orlando), any descriptions of the carnage will usually be missing from police and witness reports, while the alleged severity of it will be used as an excuse to withhold the evidence of it. Where real violence occurs (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11), the carnage is usually described in greater detail by the real victims and witnesses, and the emotional response to it is much more realistic.

Obituary notices will usually be posted and mock funerals or memorials will sometimes be staged for nonexistent victims who allegedly died in the event.

Because these staged events are sanctioned by the government, there is no need to really investigate them. Therefore the case will be wrapped up almost immediately and there will be little further evidence to deal with. The physical site of the event will often be quickly destroyed in order to remove any evidence that nothing actually occurred there.


The immediate aftermath of the event is a crucial moment when the real objective of the event first becomes apparent.

Political Pressure

The seriousness of the situation will demand an immediate response, which will be political in nature. New legislation is typically introduced soon after an event, stripping away more rights from the people and giving government more control.


The greater the emotional impact of the event, the greater the public response. The final payoff for the acting participants includes the accumulation of publicly donated money raised through private fundraising organizations. This money often reaches into the millions of dollars in very short time, propelled by government-led campaigns against gun-ownership, etc., in which several of the alleged victims or their family members are used as spokespeople, reiterating their scripted stories over and over for their audiences.


If the perpetrator dies during the event, then there will only be a short investigation in order to quickly confirm the official story.

If the perpetrator survives the event, his quick capture and isolation from the public will be followed by a quick trial and conviction, or the trial will be held off long enough to lose the public’s interest.

Investigators and prosecutors will focus only on witnesses who are favorable to the official storyline, and ignore leads and witnesses that conflict with it. 

Signs of Deceit

The following is a partial list of some things to look for in a possible false flag event. Although they don't apply in all cases, many of them will be found in a staged event. (I'll add further explanations and some examples as I'm able.)

Be warned that some of these can also be used to misdirect private investigations.

- The event is immediately high-profile in the media

- The official narrative is arrived at immediately

- Lack of real tears or emotional distress

- No evidence of real blood or carnage

At the Boston event, the blood and carnage 

were faked, as seen in this photo.

- Staged camera shots at scene

The only evidence of an evacuation of 
Sandy Hook is this staged shot.

Orlando Pulse nightclub 'victim' being carried 

towards the scene of the crime. 

- Lack of urgency in first-responders

- News reports on the event are posted before event

This is easy to get wrong, because the time stamps on internet postings don't always reflect the same time zone that the posting was made in. The time stamp of a posting might reflect the local time of the poster, or it might reflect the time zone of the person viewing it, or it might reflect the UTC (Coordinated Universal Time)

Here is a legitimate finding of an early time-stamp that was caught less than two hours after the event. This is from the Ft. Lauderdale Airport shooting on Jan. 6, 2017:

- News discussions do not waver from official narrative

- Conflicting testimonies of witnesses and victims

- Witness and victim statements sound scripted and unnatural

- Witness and victim statements use police vernacular

- Witness and victim statements change over time

- Non-existent or unrealistic motive

Columbine - Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had questionable motives.
Aurora - James Holmes had no known motive. 
Sandy Hook - Adam Lanza had no known motive. 
Orlando - Omar Mateen had a questionable motive.

- Unrealistic marksmanship of perpetrator

- Suppression/destruction of key evidence

OKC, 9/11, Sandy Hook - In each case, the building that was attacked and which contained much of the evidence of the crime was quickly destroyed. 

- Police determine deaths instead of qualified MEs

- Other important events are being distracted from

- Standard protocols aren’t followed

- Drills conducted just prior to or in parallel with event

OKC, 9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston, Orlando

- Perpetrator is immediately identified and demonized

- Investigation is quickly ended

- Loose ends and inconsistencies in official story

- Fast-tracked legislation

Soon after the event, some piece of legislation is pushed through using the event as a selling point. 

- Conspiracy theorists are demonized in the media

- Online discussions are infiltrated by hoax-deniers

- Prior ties between perpetrator and government agencies

OKC, 9/11, Boston, Orlando - The alleged perpetrators had been on terrorist watch lists and had had direct contact with government agents or their informants. 

- Unrealistic-looking/fast-healing wounds

Boston, Orlando

- Participants are involved in multiple events

- Participants have acting backgrounds

- Participants have ties to government or big business

- Perpetrator/victims have little to no online history

- Large monetary payoffs are accumulated for victims

- Fundraising websites for victim’s go online too early

- Key participants become spokespeople for political causes

David Wheeler, who allegedly lost his son at Sandy Hook, became a gun-control lobbyist for Obama. 

Patience Carter, an alleged victim in the Orlando event, became a gun-control lobbyist for Obama. 

A Look at Some Past Events

By comparing some examples of false flag events, we can more easily see what caused them to be recognized as staged events, and how they’ve become more refined over time as weaknesses have been identified and methods to deal with them have been implemented in later operations. This will allow future staged events to be more easily identified, as well as allow logical predictions to be made as to what to expect in the future.

OKC Bombing

Official story – A couple of extremists that were involved in militia groups blew up a government building with a simple fertilizer bomb, killing 169 people and injuring several hundred more. The motive was anger over the massacre at Waco.

The deaths and injuries were very real, but evidence revealed that something other than a fertilizer bomb had to have been used, and that others had been involved in the plot. There were strong indications that it was orchestrated by the government and the two perpetrators had been set up. Covering this evidence up involved a great deal of work, including destroying evidence, tampering with evidence, ignoring evidence, misreporting facts, silencing witnesses, etc., all of which was very risky and required more and more people to be aware of a cover-up as things progressed in the post-event stage.

Columbine Shooting

Official story – Two teenagers decided to shoot up their school. The motive was anger and frustration at the world. The shooters had killed 13 and wounded 24 before they finally turned the guns on themselves.

Although this event resulted in real deaths and injuries, including those of the perpetrators, the evidence revealed that there were many questionable inconsistencies regarding the number of shooters when comparing early witness reports to later police reports, as well as many other aspects of the event that weren’t able to be explained by the official story. In order to cover these up, victims and witnesses were threatened and intimidated into changing their stories and were watched for months afterwards, evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or suppressed, and official investigative reports were classified for years afterwards.

9/11 Attack

Official story – Middle-Eastern terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into the WTC towers and Pentagon, causing the towers to collapse. The motive was retaliation for American aggression in the Middle-East. 1,000s of people were killed and many more injured in the event.

The death and destruction of were real enough, but evidence revealed that the official story was full of holes, which resulted in the destruction of evidence, planting of evidence, tampering with evidence, suppression of evidence, threats and intimidation of witnesses, false statements, false reports, etc. Efforts were started to disrupt online discussions about the event, and the label of ‘conspiracy theorist’ began to be routinely used by the government and mainstream media to demonize anyone who questioned the official story.

Aurora Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman decided to booby-trap his apartment with high-tech explosive devices and then go on a shooting rampage in a local theatre, where he killed 12 people and injured 58 more. He had no apparent motive.

The evidence revealed that the event didn’t take place as reported, that there were others involved, that the perpetrator had likely been set up or was an actor, and that some or all of the alleged victims were actors. The response to this by the authorities was to ridicule those who questioned the official story and label them as ‘conspiracy theorists’.

Sandy Hook Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman woke up one morning and decided to kill his mother while she slept, and then drove to an elementary school to massacre a classroom full of children before killing himself. In the end, 28 people were dead and 2 wounded. The motive was unknown.

There was immediate suspicion that nobody died in this event. In this case, it was the lack of any physical evidence, as well as the odd activity of police and victim’s families in the immediate aftermath that raised suspicions. It was suspected that many of the participants were actors, and some were eventually recognized as participants in other staged events (Aurora, Boston). In addition to the methods of cover-up used in previous events, in this case they also included public threats to anyone who questioned the official story, as well as isolating the alleged victim’s families from reporters and private investigators, disrupting online discussions, demonizing ‘conspiracy theorists’, etc.

Boston Bombing

Official story – Two brothers who were mixed up with Islamic terrorists planted and detonated two homemade bombs at the Boston marathon before escaping on foot. This led to a city-wide lockdown while they were hunted down, leading to one being killed before the other was captured. The bombs killed 3 people and wounded 268.

Photo evidence quickly proved beyond any doubt that this event was staged and the perpetrators appeared to have been set up as patsies. It is doubtful that anyone was hurt, other than the perpetrators. All participants in the bombing except the perpetrators appear to have been actors. In spite of the photo evidence that proved this was a staged event, and the fact that many of the alleged victims recovered far more quickly than normal, and that some participants had been recognized from earlier staged events, no one in authority or in the mainstream media would acknowledge any of these facts, and instead used the ‘conspiracy theorist’ label to discredit anyone who questioned the official story.

Orlando Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman walked into a nightclub and opened fire on the crowd before barricading himself in a bathroom with a number of patrons. After a three hour stand-off, a SWAT team knocked a hole in the wall to free the hostages before killing the gunman in a shoot-out. The gunman’s motive was to show his allegiance to the Islamic State.

The evidence suggested early on that this was a staged event, due to the sloppiness of the operation. It was noticed within hours of the event that the victims and witnesses were acting, that there were no ambulances or other emergency medical services on the scene, that there were no signs of any real carnage, etc. It was also very suspicious that the alleged victims recovered so quickly and were smiling for the cameras as they eagerly related their scripted stories and asked the public to send donations.

References and Further Reading

Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the FBI

The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror

Why I Changed My Opinion on the Sandy Hook Shooting Psyop

46 Tips for Recognizing a False Flag or Other Psyop

False Flag Terror: A Historical and Analytical Overview

Understanding False Flag Operations in Our Time

The False Flag Formula – 15 Ways to Detect a False Flag Operation

Manipulated Shootings: The Profile

“False Flags” are Legal Propaganda Produced by the Department of Defense