“False Flag,” “Staged” and “Hoax”: Three Terms Missing From Most People’s Vocabulary

But they’re of upmost importance if we are to truly understand the recent rash of  mass shootings in this country.

The last two weeks have seen as many mass casualty events, one at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado, the other at a community center in San Bernardino, Calif. Both have unsurprisingly reignited the misinformed dialectic that is all too common in our monoculture; some argue we need stricter guns laws, others say all Muslims are evil, or, in the case of the Planned Parenthood shootings, that we must be on the lookout for “white Christian terrorist.” And, of course, there’s the ever-looming threat of “ISIS,” who is somehow everywhere and nowhere at once, whom the West both funds and uses as justification to wage illegal wars of aggression.

As the debate within this faulty paradigm rages, whether on the right or left, neither side really knows the true causes for these events. I can hardly ever check my Facebook without seeing one of my “friends” share some politically charged article with some type of misguided call to action and/or pseudo-intellectual explanation for what we’re seeing unfold. What’s incredibly mind-boggling is how highly intelligent people really don’t seem to question the dubious narrative and ever-changing details surrounding these events. It’s as if everything the corporate media says is absolute truth, even if the evidence doesn’t add up.

Those on the “right” blame the recent shootings on either Muslims —who, according to GOP hopeful Donald Trump, should be banned from entering the US (he’s likely trying to lose anyway) — or your basic home-grown, radicalized individual who doesn’t represent the average gun owner and would’ve probably carried out the deed anyway, sans firearms. On the other side of the faulty dialectic, the “left” believes the problems lies in too-lax gun laws, even though California’s strict gun laws couldn’t stop whatever happened in San Bernardino. With neither side agreeing — nor will they ever agree — the dialogue swirls into an endless cyclone of finger pointing, politicizing, division, hatred and overall contempt with whomever doesn’t agree with their viewpoint. But throughout the course of this cyber yelling and grandstanding, neither side ever brings up the terms “false flag,” “hoax” or “staged,” except in the context that these events are anything but. However, I believe one can’t truly understand these happenings without viewing it in a conspiratorial light.

As I outlined in one of my previous posts, my default position whenever a highly publicized shooting with a seemingly pre-packaged narrative occurs is one of skepticism. More often then not, they all bear the following properties:

false-flag

Whether it’s Sandy Hook, Aurora, the Sikh temple shooting, the Virginia TV shooting, the Paris attacks, the recent San Bernardino shooting, among others, they ALL share these traits. Every. Single. Time. Coincidence? Or something else?

Most would argue that a conspiratorial view isn’t possible, that it’s simply just too “unrealistic.” To that, I say one must merely look at the facts surrounding these events — the timeline, the evidence, the narrative, those involved — in order to plainly see a lot of it contradicts itself or flat out makes no sense. Such is what any decent journalist would conclude, but even among professional journalists — of which I know plenty — they never seem to critically examine the event, and rather just spout off some MSM-approved talking point as their own opinion, completely unaware the narrative reeks of hoaxed staged-ness.

The reason I know so many professional journalists is because I attended one of the best journalism schools in the country, and was one of its best students while enrolled. The faculty — who ranged from seasoned local reporters, to former metro-desk copy editors, to National Magazine Award winners, and even a Pulitzer-Prize-winning writer — imparted unto their students a high level of critical thinking, which is essential for truthful, objective storytelling. What’s utterly perplexing to me is that these same professional journalists don’t seem to have a clue as to the actual causes or details of the events; they just take whatever stance the Washington Post or the New York Times tells them. They taught us to dive deep into our stories, but don’t themselves dive deep into the dubious nature of these events. They talk about the Syrian conflict as if it were a true civil war and not the proxy war waged by terrorists and funded by the West to topple a legitimately elected government, for instance. They also believe these mass-casualty events are the result of mentally unstable individuals who are able to obtain military-grade firearms due to the US’s lax gun laws, and that more-restrictive regulations, as proposed by their pseudo-savior Obama, will bring about total peace on earth, without realizing these events are heavily contrived and, for the most part, total b.s.

What’s particularly mind boggling of late is how a certain former instructor of mine, seen by many as the shining example of a true journalist, is writing in-depth feature pieces propping up these questionable narratives. I won’t name names — even though no one really reads this site, I honestly don’t want to be embroiled in a possible libel case, even if the points I make are valid (I’m simply not brave enough yet to champion this cause with my real name) — but all I’ll say is that he writes for a major publication, and, while by all means a great reporter and writer, the fact he’s legitimizing these staged events with his features is utterly mind blowing to me, one of his former pupils. Perhaps he doesn’t know that the subject of his Sandy Hook story is a fraud, or the fact the official police report of said event shows multiple redactions and inconsistencies, further drawing into question the validity of said event. Perhaps he also doesn’t know that, contrary to his gripping opening in his San Bernardino piece, witnesses didn’t say it was Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, who opened fired on a company meeting, killing 14, but rather three tall, white men, dressed in tactical gear. Or maybe he doesn’t find it unlikely that a man who exhibited no prior signs of sociopathy, along with his 90-pound wife with a newborn, would shoot up a room full of people who attended their wedding and baby shower, and, while either en route to or during said shooting, the wife would pledge her allegiance to ISIS via a Facebook account that may or may not’ve been hers. Or maybe, through his reportage, he’d be able to answer all of the oddities Scott Creighton points out in this excellent blog post. Oh, and this former instructor of mine also wrote a great about the Umpqua “shooting,” which, as I and others have previously established, is highly suspect as well. Maybe he genuinely doesn’t know about those irregularities, but then again, he’s a reporter; isn’t it part of his job to investigate these loose ends?

Needless to say, I’m having a bit of a crisis of faith in my journalistic training, seeing how, when they’re not bolstering these problematic narratives by their writing, my former instructors are lending further credence to a misinformed dialectic. But they fall into the same trap as everybody else. Loose gun laws, the Second Amendment, Muslims aren’t the problem, however: the underlying problem is that these are staged events, they are false flags. They’re contrived.

I mean, who genuinely acts likes this after their mother dies?!?! (There’s plenty more where this came from.)

I won’t claim to know everything about these events, but do know that when I examine the facts surrounding these occurrences, there are a lot of question to be asked. If supposed “great” journalists aren’t asking the questions, who else will? Are you thinking for yourself, or letting the TV or a HuffPo article think for you? Who knows, maybe I’m just as duped as everyone else — or worse. But it is my belief, and I have the facts to back up my claim, that in order to truly understand what’s taking place, the terms “false flag,” “hoax” and “staged” need to be part of your vocabulary.

As for an additional kicker, let’s see how much fun it is to be involved in a false flag. They look like they’re having a blast ^_^

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s