San Bernardino: latest false flag atrocity

This latest contribution in the spread of Islamophobia by western governments and mainstream media is possibly the most childish. The American FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation, has had the bright idea of inventing a Muslim Bonnie-and-Clyde, a trigger-happy couple who go on the rampage killing innocents right and left!

The story goes as follows: In San Bernardino, California, an American-born Muslim man, Syed Rizwan Farook, and his Pakistani wife, Tashfeen Malik, carried out mass shootings of Farook's colleagues on 2 December, resulting in numerous casualties, including 14 deaths. Needless to say, as in all such false flag attacks attributed to Muslims, the couple were mercilessly gunned down and silenced for ever. As dead people tell no tales, this left the FBI free to weave a fantastic tale that defies both logic and common sense.

As the shooting was going on, it was reported live by various channels. Here are some choice morsels:

Fox Los Angeles reports that the suspects are “white males” in “military gear” and armed with “rifles.”

Police have warned people not to talk to the media. At one point the reporter attempted to interview a witness and multiple officers rushed up and pushed the reporters and the witnesses apart.

San Bernardino Police Department Lt. Richard Lawhead said that their SWAT team happened to be conducting training nearby. The team was suited, “ready to roll” and responded rapidly.

This is a classic tell-tale sign of a false flag operation! Comment:

"What makes this noteworthy is that this is not the first time that emergency drills for the exact scenario unfolding were taking place at virtually the same moment the actual terrorist attacks began.

Paris-area emergency personnel and ambulance crews were taking part in a simulated emergency exercise on the very same day the Paris terrorist attacks took place.

During the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., North American Aerospace Defense Command’s (NORAD) was in the midst of a training exercise called Vigilant Guardian, which “coincidentally” simulated planes being hijacked by terrorists."

You can read an account of the live reporting here

Two days later, on Friday, 4 December, this circus had a comedy sequel when the alleged murderers' house, which had been used to store a multitude of weapons and ammunition, was invaded by dozens of reporters who showed off the couple's personal belongings to the whole world on live television!

Switch off your brains

According to FBI, the couple had engaged in a shoot-out with the police. When pictures of their getaway car were taken it was found to have the windows rolled up with the glass shattered. The pictures of the dead couple showed them to be handcuffed. How on earth is it possible for a person to be hand-cuffed and engage in a shootout with car windows rolled up? 

The car was riddled with bullet holes made by the police shooters, who had made sure the couple had died.  Capturing them alive was obviously not an option as that would have made it impossible for FBI to spin its fantastic story, which defies common sense. Killing alleged Muslim "terrorists" is standard practice while the police has no trouble arresting alive non-Muslim pink-coloured mass murderers, who are never called terrorists. This linkage of "terrorism" with Islam is an essential psychological trick behind the satanic Islamophobia campaign being conducted by western Establishments (governments/bureaucracy/media/security forces).

A report published at the website of Veterans Today lays bare the false propaganda that has been raging about the San Bernardino massacre of innocents. As the report points out, why would radical Muslims kill innocent people rather than high-level individuals such as "Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Dov Zakheim, and the other architects of the genocidal War on Islam". Click this link:

San Bernardino Shooting

FOOTNOTE, added 11 December 2015

San Bernardino Incident Has the Earmarks of a False Flag. Testimony of Eyewitnesses

By Stephen Lendman

Global Research, December 11, 2015

Region: USA

Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism', Intelligence, Police State & Civil Rights

 75 

  10  8 

  152

Justifiable suspicions about what happened surfaced straightaway after the incident.

The alleged perpetrators, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik,appear to have been used as convenient patsies – the same way April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing suspects Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Dzhokhar were unjustly framed for a crime they didn’t commit.

False flag attacks are used to stoke fear, to enlist public support for planned domestic and foreign horrors. Events post-9/11 are well-documented. What’s unfolding now looks like more of the same – the phony pretext of combating ISIS, state-sponsored high crimes at home and abroad.

Eyewitnesses to the San Bernardino shooting said three white gunmen in black military attire, armed with assault rifles, were responsible.

Sally Abdelmageed working at the Inland Regional Center described them this way, saying “(a)s soon as they opened up the doors to building three…one of them (began) shoot(ing) into the room.”

“I couldn’t see a face. He had a black hat on…black cargo pants, the kind with the big puffy pockets on the side…long sleeve shirt…gloves…huge assault rifle…six magazines…I just saw three dressed exactly the same.”

“It looked like their skin color was white. They look like they were athletic(ally) buil(t), and they appeared to be tall” – clearly professionals, carrying out a well-planned attack, the way all false flags are conducted.

Abdelmageed and other eyewitnesses gave similar accounts, debunking the official narrative – a Big Lie, framing two innocent Muslim patsies, killed by police to tell no tales, given no chance to explain their innocence.

Their bodies were found handcuffed, indicating they were apprehended and likely extrajudicially executed to be unable to refute the official narrative.

Former NSA/CIA contractor Steven D. Kelley told Press TV intimated that hired guns allegedly from Craft International (a Blackwater type paramilitary group, the same one responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings) could have been behind the San Bernardino shootings. (see below)

The incident “is just one in a long string of false flag events that I am afraid to say are not over,” he said. “We’ll probably be seeing several more before the end of the year, because of the events that are going on in the world, specifically with NATO implicated in the buying of (stolen Iraqi and Syrian oil complicit with) Daesh and other events.”

“(W)hen these things happen, they need to have a rapid response which requires a false flag attack. This was very obvious that this was going to happen” – with lots more to come, Kelly believes, part of Washington’s well-orchestrated fear-mongering campaign.

The early stages of its dirty aftermath are playing out, most Americans mindless about how they’re being duped.

[The link to this article is San Bernardino ]

If you wish to read more on the subject, click on:

What really happened behind the scenes

Francois Hollande: a traitorous French politician

Francois Hollande, the current French president, has presided over two horrendous terrorist attacks on Paris. The first one, in January this year, resulted in the deaths of 12 people while the second attack, carried out on Friday 13 November, left 129 dead. This number is expected to rise considerably as more deaths occur among those in critical condition.

The obscene policies pursued by Hollande - willingly or under pressure from the Americans - are spelt out with great clarity in Tony Cartalucci's article, published by the Centre for Research on Globalisation. This is copied below.

CONFIRMED: French Government Knew Extremists BEFORE Paris Terrorist Attack

By Tony Cartalucci

Global Research, November 14, 2015

Land Destroyer Report

Region: Europe, Middle East & North Africa

Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism'

In-depth Report: SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR?

 201 

  30  1 

 

  243

 As predicted and previously reported, terrorists who took part in an unprecedented attack in the center of Paris killing over a 100 and injuring hundreds more, were well-known to French security agencies before the attack took place.

The UK Daily Mail reported in its article, “Hunt for the Isis killers: One terrorist identified as ‘young Frenchman known to authorities’ – another two found with Syrian and Egyptian passports,” that:

One of the terrorists involved in last night’s attacks in Paris has been officially identified as a Parisian, according to local media reports.

The man, who was killed at the Bataclan, was identified using his fingerprints and was from the southern Parisian neighbourhood of Courcouronnes.

French reports say that the man, who was around 30 years old, was already known to French anti-terrorist authorities prior to last night’s attacks. (emphasis added)

Similarly in January 2015 in the wake of the “Charlie Hebo attack” which left 12 dead, it was revealed that French security agencies tracked the perpetrators for nearly a decade beforehand, having arrested at least one terrorist a total of two times, incarcerating him at least once, tracked two of them overseas where they had trained with known terrorist organizations and possibly fought alongside them in Syria, before tracking them back to French territory.Astoundingly, French security agencies never moved in on the terrorists, claiming that after a decade of tracking them, they had finally decided to close their case for precisely the amount of time needed for them to plan and execute their grand finale.More Wars and More Surveillance Can’t Help  

With a similar scenario now emerging, particularly in the wake of the “Charlie Hebo attack,” where French security agencies knew about extremists but failed to stop them before carrying out yet another high-profile attack, even with enhanced surveillance powers granted to them by recent legislation, it appears that no amount of intrusive surveillance or foreign wars will stem a terrorist problem the French government itself seems intent on doing nothing to stop.The problem is not France’s immigration laws. Dangerous people are in France, but they are being tracked by French security agencies. The problem is not Syria. Terrorists have left to fight there, acquired deadly skills and affiliations before returning to France, but have likewise been tracked by French security agencies. Instead, the problem is that French security agencies are doing nothing about these dangerous individuals knowingly living, working, and apparently plotting in the midst of French society.In the coming hours and days, the French government and its various co-conspirators in their proxy war against Syria will propose a plan of action they claim will stem the terrorist threat France and the rest of Europe faces. But the reality is, the problem is not something the French government can solve, because the problem is clearly the French government itself.

ISIS is Behind the Paris Attacks, But Who is Behind ISIS? 

With the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) emerging as being behind the attack, the question that remains is, who is behind ISIS itself? While the West has attempted to maintain the terrorist organization possesses almost mythological abilities, capable of sustaining combat operations against Syria, Iraq, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, support from Iran, and now the Russian military – all while carrying out large-scale, high-profile terrorist attacks across the globe – it is clear that ISIS is the recipient of immense multinational state-sponsorship.

The rise of ISIS was revealed as early as 2007 in interviews conducted by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 9-page report “The Redirection.” The interviews revealed a plan to destabilize and overthrow the government of Syria through the use of sectarian extremists – more specifically, Al Qaeda – with arms and funds laundered through America’s oldest and stanchest regional ally, Saudi Arabia.

A more recent Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) report drafted in 2012 (.pdf) admitted:

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

The DIA report enumerates precisely who these “supporting powers” are:

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

And to this day, by simply looking at any number of maps detailing territory held by various factions amid the Syrian conflict, it is clear that ISIS is not a “state” of any kind, but an ongoing invasion emanating from NATO-member Turkey’s territory, with its primary supply corridor crossing the Turkish-Syrian borderbetween the Syrian town of Ad Dana and the western bank of the Euphrates River, a supply corridor now increasingly shrinking.

Image: ISIS-held territory seen in dark grey forms a corridor directly up to the Syrian-Turkish border – or more accurately, begins at the Turkish-Syrian border. In recent days, this corridor has faced being completely cut off by joint Syrian-Russian gains in and around Aleppo and toward the western bank of the Euphrates River. East of the Euphrates is already held by Kurds and Syrian forces. NATO is clearly providing ISIS’ primary support, and yet ISIS is alleged to have been behind an attack on a NATO member.

In fact, the desperation exhibited by the West and its efforts to oust the Syrian government and salvage its proxy force now being decimated by joint Syrian-Russian military operations, is directly proportional to the diminishing size and stability of this corridor.

Just last week, Syrian forces reestablished firm control over the Kweyris military airport, which was under siege for years. The airport is just 20 miles from the Euphrates, and, as Syrian forces backed by Russian airpower work their way up toward the Turkish border along the Syrian coast, constitutes a unified front that will essentially cut off ISIS deeper inside Syria for good.

Should ISIS’ supply lines be cut in the north, the organization’s otherwise inexplicable fighting capacity will atrophy. The window for the West’s “regime change” opportunity is quickly closing, and perhaps in a last ditch effort, France has jammed the spilled blood and broken bodies of its own citizens beneath the window to prevent it from closing for good.

The reality is that France knew the “Charlie Hebo” attackers, they knew beforehand those involved in the most recent Paris attack, and they likely know of more waiting for their own opportunity to strike. With this knowledge, they stood by and did nothing. What’s more, it appears that instead of keeping France safe, the French government has chosen to use this knowledge as a weapon in and of itself against the perception of its own people, to advance its geopolitical agenda abroad.

If the people of France want to strike hard at those responsible for repeated terrorist attacks within their borders, they can start with those who knew of the attacks and did nothing to stop them, who are also, coincidentally, the same people who helped give rise to ISIS and help perpetuate it to this very day.

The original source of this article is Land Destroyer Report

Copyright © Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer Report, 2015

---

9/11 : the annual ritual of lies and hypocritical playacting

For the fourteenth year in succession we are going to observe on 11 September the sickening sight of world "leaders" playacting respectful silence, laying wreaths with solemn faces, looking sombre and delivering hypocritical speeches about their resolve to bring "peace" whatever the cost (meaning: invasions of foreign lands, genocidal killings and control of their natural resources). These brazen attempts to persuade people to believe in the farce of a magical attack on the world's sole superpower, with impregnable defences, by technically backward people living in remote Afghanistan have made the USA and NATO countries the laughing stock of social media. In the post-Orwellian world that we live in today the mainstream media are the principal means in the hands of the corrupt democracies to deceive people and sell lies as truths by repeating those lies endlessly.

On 11 September 2001, 3 towers in New York, made of concrete and steel, collapsed inexplicably in a heap of dust. Two of these had been hit by airplanes in the upper storeys but the third tower - WTC7 - just imploded magically, in the same way as the other two had. Following the first two implosions, a BBC reporter stood belting out the drivel assigned to her by her masters at the BBC while the third tower stood tall in the background! This video, showing the woman announcing the collapse of WTC7 well before it did so, can be watched in the following account of the event by the highly respected Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, published at their website on 21 November, 2012. The video will bring home to you how the presstitute media serve the western oligarchies operating under the cloak of democracy.

How Did They Know? 

Examining the Foreknowledge of Building 7’s Destruction

Written by Dennis McMahon, J.D., L.L.M.

WTC Building 7, also known as the Salomon Brothers Building or WTC 7, was a 47–story skyscraper that was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, Building 7 would have been the tallest high-–rise in thirty–three of our United States. Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker,” along with several major financial institutions.

BBC correspondent Jane Standley reported the destruction of WTC 7 before it collapsed – even though the building was still standing behind her.

Building 7, which was 100 yards from the Twin Towers, was not hit by an airplane on September 11, 2001, and suffered only minimal damage from debris falling from the North Tower. Several fires began burning on a few floors, and the entire building completely collapsed – almost into its own footprint – at 5:20 p.m. Numerous eyewitnesses, including members of the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) and other first responders, and multiple news sources, made statements that indicate that there was foreknowledge that WTC 7 was going to come down, despite the fact that no skyscraper in history had ever completely collapsed due to fire. (Much of this evidence of foreknowledge is detailed on the website of the Remember Building 7 campaign and other related sites.)

Where foreknowledge of an extremely unusual event is demonstrated, the possibility must be considered that the foreknowledge derived directly or indirectly from those who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself. Thus, if foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 can be shown, this would be a strong indication that Building 7 was subjected to controlled demolition, and that advance warning of Building 7’s demise derived ultimately from those who intended to bring the building down. Thus, foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 is not only consistent with, but supportive of, the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Certainty of impending collapse

To worry that a damaged building might collapse in some fashion is one thing. But to be certain that it will collapse is another. A detailed study of the FDNY accounts by 9/11 researcher Graeme MacQueen shows that more than half of those who received warnings of WTC 7’s collapse (where a degree of certainty can be determined from the reports) were certain or were told with certainty that Building 7 was coming down. (The figures calculate to 31 out of 58. See MacQueen’s report “Waiting for Seven…” at page 4.)

Early FDNY announcements of collapse

If someone were observing the fires in WTC 7 and able to determine, in the last few moments of the building’s existence, that a peculiar set of circumstances was beginning to threaten the building, that would be one thing. But to receive warnings of the building’s collapse well before this set of circumstances arose raises suspicion. Yet, a detailed study of the FDNY reports shows that of the thirty-three cases where the time of warning can be determined, in ten cases warnings were received two or more hours in advance, and in six cases warnings were apparently received four or more hours in advance. (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 4.) In other words, the warnings came long before the unique set of circumstances had allegedly come together to cause the building’s collapse.

Precise warnings of collapse

If the collapse warnings were derived from vague worries and concerns, as claimed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the warnings would not have been precise. A complete collapse, such as happened to WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 on 9/11, was unknown – unless the building was being brought down by controlled demolition. That is why FDNY member James McGlynn could say on 9/11, in reference to one of the Towers, “Any time I’ve heard of a collapse, it was never an entire building like this turned out to be.” (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven‚” at page 21.) Nevertheless, somehow, many people knew in advance that WTC 7 would suffer an unprecedented collapse. Which begs the question, “How did they know?” Consider the following exchange from the FDNY oral histories:

• Q. “Were you there when building 7 came down in the afternoon?”
• A: “Yes”
• Q. “You were still there?”
• A. “Yes, so basically they measured out how far the building was going to come, so we knew exactly where we could stand.”
• Q. “So they just put you in a safe area, safe enough for when that building came down?“
• A. “Five blocks. Five blocks away. We still could see. Exactly right on point, the cloud stopped right there.”(See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 8.)

How did construction workers and police on the scene of WTC 7 that afternoon know that “The building is about to blow up”?

It is quite remarkable that a debris cloud estimate could be so precise for a collapse that was supposedly caused by unforeseen and unplanned events. Had Building 7 “tipped over,” which would have been more realistic, given the structural damage that was supposed to be the reason for its collapse, the building could actually have ended up crushing several other tall buildings, creating a destruction zone much farther away from the building.

Building 7’s collapse reported in advance by CNN and the BBC

Click on the image above to play the video clip…

In this BBC video, correspondent Jane Standley reports that Building 7 has collapsed; meanwhile (at the 1:17 mark), a fully intact Building 7 can actually be seen — still standing — behind her. Who fed this information to Standley? Apparently, someone who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, released that information to the media prematurely.

CNN’s Aaron Brown searches for WTC 7 in the New York skyline after reporting that it had collapsed an hour early. The arrow points to WTC 7 – Click on the image above to play the video clip…

In another news clip, while Building 7 is seen standing fully erect and showing no signs of impending trauma, CNN’s Aaron Brown gives the following report: “We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, Building 7, in the World Trade Center complex, is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing…” Who is he “getting information” from? Again, it appears to be from someone who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, and who released that information to the media prematurely. Only such an individual could have expected Building 7 to come down.

In sum, both CNN and BBC did not merely report that WTC 7 was damaged or that it might collapse. Instead, they prematurely announced the actual collapse of Building 7. No satisfactory explanation has been given about these premature announcements, which were obviously based on data fed to the announcers, apparently by an unknown person or persons who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, and who bungled matters by releasing that information to the media prematurely.

Click on the image above to play the video clip…

More evidence of foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 is preserved in this video where an eyewitnesses can be heard saying: “Keep your eye on that building. It’ll be coming down soon.” And “The building is about to blow up. Move it back.” And also, “We are walking back. The building is about to blow up.”

These reports were later corroborated by first responder Indira Singh, who, in a radio interview about Building 7, revealed that the FDNY had stated that “We’re going to have to bring it down.“

Countdown…

First responder Kevin McPadden has provided key eyewitness evidence regarding the foreknowledge of WTC 7’s destruction. – Click on the image above to play the video clip …

The testimony of Kevin McPadden, an emergency medical technician and 9/11 first responder, is even more shocking. In a taped interview, McPadden indicated that there was an actual countdown preceding Building 7’s collapse:

“The Red Cross rep was like, he goes over and he says [to us], ‘You gotta stay behind this line because they’re thinking about bringing the building down.’…He goes over and he asks one of the…firefighters what was going on…He came back over with his hand over the radio and [you could hear] what sounded like a countdown. And, at the last few seconds, he took his hand off [the radio] and you heard ‘three-two-one,’ and he was just saying, ‘Just run for your life! Just run for your life!’ And then it was like another two, three seconds, you heard explosions. Like, BA-BOOOOOM! And it’s like a distinct sound…BA-BOOOOOM! And you felt a rumble in the ground, like, almost like you wanted to grab onto something. That, to me, I knew that was an explosion. There was no doubt in my mind…”

NIST’s Response to WTC 7 foreknowledge

NIST has tried to evade the issue of foreknowledge of WTC 7’s collapse in its report on the building’s destruction by implying:

• (a) that the FDNY, on the scene, saw the damage to the building caused by the collapse of WTC 1 and rationally concluded that WTC 7 might collapse; and
• (b) that an engineer, early in the day, saw the damage to the building and concluded it might collapse passing on this assessment to others (as per NIST Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder, in a discussion with Graeme MacQueen on CKNX Radio, Wingham, Ontario, on Aug. 25, 2008).

It is true that damage to WTC 7 was directly witnessed by some firefighters and, apparently, led a few (about seven) of them to worry that the building might collapse. However, the great majority (approximately fifty) who were worried about collapse did not base this worry on the physical damage but on what they were told. (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 5.) Moreover, while an engineer may have communicated his opinion, early in the day, that the building might collapse, neither this communication nor communications from the FDNY is sufficient to explain all of the collective evidence indicating foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse.

Individually, each of the factors discussed above indicates the possibility of foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse: the certainty of Building 7’s impending collapse as expressed and memorialized in the FDNY oral histories, the early announcements made by the FDNY, the precise nature of the early announcements, CNN’s and the BBC’s premature reporting of Building 7’s collapse, and the actual countdown to Building 7’s demise. Collectively, these factors provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that this foreknowledge is most readily explained by the fact that Building 7 was brought down in an explosive controlled demolition carefully planned months in advance.

FOOTNOTE: added 22 September 2015

Here is an excellent summary of the USA's act of self-harm, 9/11, and its consequences over the succeeding years. By Paul Craig Roberts:

My Crime,Your Punishment