We have … used that computer model about input, process, output, where the process is the thinking about whatever the input, or activating event is. … I remember the first time I talked about this on the show was after the supposed assassination of Osama bin Laden … in 2011 … May … Obama gets up and he gives a speech where he basically says “Yup. We got some actionable intelligence about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. We sent this elite group in called Seal Team Six …” that sounds like something out of a Hollywood movie … “and they killed bin Laden.”

Ten minute speech, over a hundred logical fallacies. No evidence presented. They dumped the body in the ocean. And like an hour later people were doing the Pledge of Allegiance at Ground Zero. Not a lot of processing [of] evidence there.

I’ll never forget the day I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and one of his callers – it was a rare caller who was taking issue with something he said – and the caller had the audacity to say, on the air, “Well, I really encourage your listeners to do their own research.” And Rush Limbaugh snapped at him and said “No! My listeners don’t need to do their own research. That’s what I’m for.”
(Bruce Veinotte, January 20, 2014 Podcast #331, Procrastinating NOW! (or soon), Part 2 – Techniques for Less Worry and More Action)

It is rare to come across anyone in this land who can see through something so transparent as the supposed killing of Osama bin Laden back in 2011. No evidence, body dumped in the ocean, no photos, as they are too gruesome (say the people who rush ISIS beheading videos front and center for us). I saw all around me that people were eating it up (the Pledge at Ground Zero inducing “think I’m gonna puke” sensations). And I thought “what the hell is wrong with these people?”

My way of thinking is far more basic – do not go where evidence does not take me. It is called “critical thinking,” otherwise known in this dunce-capped land of ignominy as “having a conspiracy theory.”

The events around Charlie Hebdo are fraught with similar lapses in credible evidence, the very photos of the supposed Kouachi Brothers are two men wearing hoods! Come on people! At what point do you stop trusting?

There is one event during that affair that might prove a Rosetta Stone to what really happened. Police Chief Helric Fredou supposedly committed suicide hours after the other killings. The story is slipping down the memory hole, as it does not fit the narrative. But for people who actually have critical thinking skills, and even an ounce of natural skepticism, it has to register with a loud thud. Something ain’t right.

JC, over at 4&20 cites the following from Paul Craig Roberts:

Neoconservatives arrayed in their Washington offices are congratulating themselves on their success in using the Charlie Hebdo affair to reunite Europe with Washington’s foreign policy. No more French votes with the Palestinians against the Washington-Israeli position. No more growing European sympathy with the Palestinians. No more growing European opposition to launching new wars in the Middle East. No more calls from the French president to end the sanctions against Russia.

That more or less sums up what I would call a “credible motive.” No doubt Roberts struggled with the word “using” instead of “causing.” And no doubt he knows, as I do, that when he uses the word “neoconservatives,” he includes one who doesn’t mingle with them in public but surely knows them all in private, Barack Obama.

We suffered now fourteen years of Neocons in the White House. I don’t worry too much about that, however, as I know the power of that office to register just barely above zero.
There’s an old Taoist saying: “Those who know don’t say; those that say don’t know.”

The shooters in the images to the left are, we are told, the Kouachi Brothers. How do we know that? They are masked, after all. They could be anyone from CIA to Mossad to MI6 to the Tsarnaev … Hey! The news says those are the Kouachi Brothers! That’s all you need to know. Shut off your mind. Get those swirlies going in those eyes. Believe, dammit. Believe.

Here’s a news item from Le Monde, which ought to seal the case.

PARIS (AFP) – Investigators disclosed today that Bernard Maris, chief editor of Charlie Hebdo, was mortally wounded by Warren Commission Exhibit 399, otherwise known as the “magic bullet.” Officials at the National Archives in Washington, DC, confirmed on Thursday that the bullet, long encased in a thick plastic display, had escaped the week prior and was known to be on the loose, doing its thing again. Its whereabouts are currently unknown. Citizens world-wide are advised to be on the lookout for a pristine bullet that stops in midair, makes sharp turns, and shows no wear despite having caused unimaginable human suffering.

In other news, from trusted source New York Times…

PARIS – Investigators, who thought they had found Said Kouachi’s ID in a getaway vehicle backtracked, saying that to their own amazement the ID was actually that of 9/11 hijacker Satam Al Suqami (whose ID was also found in the rubble of seven buildings in New York in 2001 even as no plane parts manage to survive the cataclysm). How it made its way to the scene of the Paris shootings is a mystery. “But,” said a police investigator, “we have found with events of this nature that strange things happen and that we are wise just to keep quiet and believe what we see. Otherwise, we might get 399’d.”

I love to make fun of the ordinary Joe, the doe-eyed casual news observer who sees events like this and unquestioningly accepts all the evidence as real. But I have been that doe-eyed person. I have taken events on the news at face, only later being set straight by those of more skeptical bent. So after years of observation, getting better as time goes on, it is easy to see the holes in Charlie Hebdo and be highly suspicious that this is yet another false flag.

That, of course, does not solve the crime. As anyone who as plunged the depths of these events knows, the underworld of intelligence operations is littered with false clues, false leads, and real domestic white Christian criminal masterminds. It is important, then, to try to keep eyes on the prize. To what end? It was easy to see with 9/11 that the object was a clash of civilizations, and attacks on a string of Middle East countries that happened to be Muslim. Charlie Hebdo appears to be designed to advance that narrative.

I do not know, of course. I do live in a parallel universe to the typical observer of events, seeing through most lies, probably only fooled on a higher level. After all, the “clues” left behind in events like 9/11, Boston, Hebdo are so stinking obvious that it is almost as if we are being taunted. “Look,” they are saying. “Look at the ease with which we fool John Q. Citizen. What are you gonna do about us?”

Here’s a guy who can string together clues over decades, making a case that many major events in our recent past are contrived for higher purposes.

“There have been four incapacitating political crisis in Washington since World War II: McCarthyism, Dallas, Watergate and Contragate. Students have been struck by the deep continuities between them: continuities of personnel, transnationality, and outcome. … By their decadic regularity, they deserve to be regarded as period readjustments of the open political system in which we live. At the center of all four crisis have been perceived threats to the prosecution of the Cold War. … I am not suggesting that the four crises were part of some single conspiracy, only that we should recognize that in all cases the outcome was roughly the same: a prolongation of a system committed to the Cold War. … In all four crises, one sees the recurrence of CIA and other intelligence officials and assets, repeatedly those with more militant anti-Communist stances than the Presidents they have worked under. Another common denominator for such individuals has been the exposure to narcotic trafficking, from the China Lobby of the 1950s to the Contra support networks of the 1980s’.

In the case of Dallas, Watergate, and Contragate, a common denominator at a lower level has been former CIA Cubans working with [Johnny] Roselli and [John] Martino at the JM/WAVE CIA station in Miami. I suspect this continuity is more of a symptom of deeper relationships than a major causal factor in itself, but the symptoms are over and hardly marginal. (Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK)

Since the end of the Cold War all of the happenstance events of terror involve a clash of cultures of a different type. Once it was Commies under every bed, now it is terrorists. Every event from 1990 forward has invoked Islamic archetypes. In the next theater, after the Middle East is subdued, I suppose our nightmares will be occupied by Chinese, or Russians, or who knows … but the obvious point is that within our own societies there exists an evil force that is managing our in-house movie, making sure we hate and fear the correct enemies so that the state is not impeded in its ongoing wars of aggression.

Images of Abu Ghraib torture were kept off American media, as our president did not want to upset our sensitivities. Recently images of beheadings by supposed ISIS members (more likely covert Western agents, says parallel universe guy) have made their way directly to our screens unimpeded by any thoughts of our sensitivities.

C’mon, people. Think about it. Who is managing your internal movie screen?

Throughout history one person has been at the center of the most important events … the patsy. The events in France clearly indicate that Said and Charif Kouachi were patsies. My prime evidence in this matter is this: They are now dead. There will be no trial. That’s key in false flag operations. There can be no inquiry after the fact.

Here’s an interesting sequence of events, back in 1963 (the use of patsies goes way back in history, to Guy Fawkes and before). It’s one of those things that we simply accept at face value until we realize that it had to be planned. Lee Oswald was given a ride to work on the day Kennedy was murdered by a co-worker, Buell Frazier, who later testified that Oswald was carrying a package that the Warren Commission would say contained his gun.

But stop and think. If Oswald was being sheepdipped in the months prior to the assassination, he had to be monitored. He had to be kept available, out of jail, in the area. And indeed Oswald had a collection of ‘friends” – people of high station who we now know were CIA agents, Michael and Ruth Paine, and the white Russian immigrant George de Mohrenschildt. Such people are assigned the task of “babysitting” the patsy.

But what about Frazier? His job, it would appear, was critical, and not to be left to any ordinary Joe. He was assigned the task of making sure that Oswald went to work that day. What if Kennedy was murdered, and the patsy had called in sick?

Was Frazier part of the plot? Most likely he was hired and paid to do a job, and then later understood his role, and knew he’d be wise to shut up. After all, he is still alive. That’s a tell.

Patsies are housed and stabled and kept available for events as needed. When we hear that the Kouachi’s were on a “terrorist watch” list, I quickly understood the real meaning of that phrase. They were being watched by the real terrorists, and made ready when needed to take the fall for a crime.

So too, as the discerning eye looks at 9/11, for instance, we see the supposed hijackers kept on the loose, and reports on the suspicious activates mysteriously bottled up at lower levels of our law enforcement bureaucracy. The patsies were being babysat, moles inside the agencies were protecting them. They had to kelp kept free and available to take the fall on 9/11.

I assume they are all dead for real now, but imagine the horror that Mohammad Atta experienced when he saw what the photoshoppers at CIA had done with his photograph – they made him into a monster! They widened his head, lowered his ears (look at how they are almost down on his neck!), gave him a brand new mouth and chin, and made his eyes into sinister torches. Why, it’s the stuff nightmares are made of!

False flaggery, and this attack in France has all the earmarks of that, can only work if the ground is fertile. It plays into hatred. People love to hate selected groups, and Muslims right now are that group. The murders in France, now pinned on Muslim terrorists, feed hatred. People are loving it, eating it up. It feels so very good to be so morally superior. Now we get to go on a killing spree of our own. Hatred fuels more hatred, murder fuels massacres.

Americans, lock and load! More massacres are about to be committed in your name. Stand up, be counted. Be part of it.
_____________
PS: By the way, you have to develop an eye for this sort of thing, but if you focus on the “Atta” photo above and on the right, you’ll easily see that under the nose is someone else’s mouth and chin, a total paste up, with the real Atta’s eyes and lowered ears, widened face. The lines where two photos are blended are obvious. Look closely, you’ll see two people in one photo. I can’t believe they get away with this stuff, but hell, it was on TV news. It’s true.