Posted on

Manchester: Don’t Believe the Truth [2017)

This is the first time I will have “reviewed” a bombing.

Sure.

I “reviewed” Trump’s missile strike on Syria.

And that was an example of what an independent thinker does.

I am a huge Trump supporter.

But I was really, REALLY pissed off when he fell for the false flag chemical weapons attack in Syria.

Indeed, in no strategic universe would it have made sense for Syria to use chemical weapons AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME on its own people.

The timing was absurd.

And so I could state my gut:  I DON’T BUY IT.

But I will tell you something, dear friends:  I am pissed off again.

Because I do not buy the veracity of the story being proffered worldwide concerning the “bombing” in Manchester last night.

Rather than rehash what I wrote yesterday about the “event”, I want to give you further insight into my skepticism.

A detail I left out last night was that the Mancunian bloke who appeared on Tucker Carlson was unequivocal in his assertion that security for the Ariana Grande concert was more lax than at other shows he had attended.

Just what did he mean?

Well, he specified that prior shows he had attended included “pat-downs”.

Ok.

So, according to this gentleman (whose name I sadly do not know), there were no pat-downs at last night’s show.

Which begs a question:

If security was so fucking lax, why didn’t the bomber just buy a ticket and walk in?

I mean, really.

Is “22 dead” seriously the meaning of “maximum casualties” (what this genius “mastermind” is purported to have effected) when there were 20 FUCKING THOUSAND people inside?

I don’t think so.

And, as the healthy skeptic Wayne Madsen pointed out today on his website, “What happened to enhanced security for transport stations after the 7/1/05 London transit attacks.”

Notice the location of the transit station, the location of the arena, and the “in-between” where this incident is said to have occurred.

manchester1

Again, not to belabor (or belabour) the point, but THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE YOU WOULD STAGE A FAKE (!) TERROR ATTACK if this venue was the desired locale.

Madsen goes on to outline what I alluded to last night:  “Very convenient to have a terrorist attack as Theresa May’s opinion polls prior to election were plummeting.”

Now.

As my readers know, I am not a big fan of socialism.

Indeed, with the election of Donald Trump, there has been (within the U.S. and in my own heart as well) a blooming of respect for capitalism.

Free markets.

Not monopoly capitalism.

But VALUE CREATION.

This was what I took away from my MBA studies.

Not that it makes a difference, but my degree (conferred this past December) was with a 4.00 GPA over the course of 2 years.

My bachelor’s degree was in music.

That’s a 180 degree shift.

Which is to say, I’M A SERIOUS FUCKER.

I can give you detail.

I can cite sources.

I can abide by every comma of the APA style guide.

But this website is my HOBBY.

I want to write about film.

Cinema.

But I am human.

So I write about sports.

And politics.

But I feel it is incumbent upon me as a human being to SAY SOMETHING when things seem awry.

Something is rotten in North West England.

The best article I’ve found yet is by Dr. Kevin Barrett.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/05/23/man22/

As Dr. Barrett points out, even a surface glance at the symbology of this event points to something more nefarious than organic (Islamic) terror.

[yes, there are such things…like synthetic, state-sponsored terror…see Orwell’s 1984 if “self-inflicted attack” seems outside the realm of Machiavellian statecraft]

Twenty-two.

“When you’re twenty-two,” sang The Flaming Lips (all those years ago).

Salman Abedi (if he even existed) is said to have been 22 when he blew himself up last night.

22 people died (we are told).

And it was the 22nd of May.

22/22/22

Not very reassuring for those conspiracy-minded among us.

But in case you are feeling less than certain about the possibility that the Manchester “attack” was in some ways bollocks, heed the words of former U.S. State Department official (and arch-spook) Dr. Steve Pieczenik.

Dr. Pieczenik makes it clear:  no more false flags!

Yes, we are for Trump (me and a few others), but we will not tolerate state-sponsored hoaxes (whether people really die or not).

And Pieczenik outlines them:

9/11, Sandy Hook, Orlando…

Which brings me back to my false flag continuum theory (which owes a great deal to the most erudite Dr. Webster Tarpley).

Tarpley wrote the best book on 9/11.

It is a mouthful, but 9/11 Synthetic Terror:  Made in USA is a masterpiece.

And I don’t agree with Tarpley’s politics.

Tarpley hates Trump.  Madsen hates Trump.

[Pieczenik likes Trump…and so do I]

But this is not about politics.

This is about being SICK of FAKERY!

Tarpley outlined too main “types” of conspiracy explanations for 9/11.

LIHOP–that the U.S. government Let It Happen On Purpose

and

MIHOP–that the U.S. government MADE It Happen On Purpose

I would ask my readers to visualize false-flag terrorism (and real, Islamic [for instance] terrorism) as existing on a continuum.

This is where fuzzy logic comes in.

We know Trump is at least intuitively smart (and I believe he’s a genius) because he understands (and wields) the term “very fake news”.

Yes, Donald:  CNN is “very fake news”.

Correct.

Well-done!

But Fox News is often “fake news” itself.

Like tonight, for instance.

On “The Five”…

These people are not discussing anything consequential whatsoever.

It’s just a political circus of splitting hairs…ruminating on symptoms…seeing how many angels they can fit on the head of a pin.

Real journalists would get at the ROOT CAUSE of the sickness.

“The Five” never approached such.

And that speaks to the level of media infiltration by the CIA.

Without delving too far into the history of Operation Mockingbird, you can take the present day temperature with this story:

http://russia-insider.com/en/media-criticism/german-journalist-who-blew-whistle-cia-media-control-drops-dead-56/ri18544

So “The Five” and all the rest of the mainstream media have parameters within which they must operate.

“You can talk about this, but you can’t talk about that.  Etc.”

Once a network or journalist acquiesces to such, they cease to be REAL journalists or trusted providers of information.

Sadly, Sean Hannity blew it tonight on his show by saying that he would no longer pursue the Seth Rich story.

Pretty disappointing.

The MSM almost always disappoints me, but it was a truly-breathtaking about face by the only mainstream voice (Hannity) to evince curiosity about Seth Rich’s murder.

Sad.

Which brings us to Trump.  And Manchester.

If (conditional statement) the Manchester attack was real, then Trump was appropriately pithy and even elegant in his diatribe about “losers”.

I agree with the President.

Terrorists are losers.  Especially the terrorists who work within our own governments.

And so we get back to that stubborn continuum.

Did anyone die at the Manchester Arena?  I don’t know.

If Sandy Hook is any indication, a zero-fatality event would be possible to contrive.

If  people died, then was it really a suicide bomber who inflicted the carnage?

Not necessarily.

A bomb could have been planted beforehand.

BY ANYONE!

Almost exactly one year ago, Manchester United’s last match of the season was cancelled because A FAKE BOMB WAS ACCIDENTALLY LEFT BEHIND BY A SECURITY FIRM.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/15/manchester-united-abandon-final-premier-league-game-after-security-alert-leads-to-old-trafford-evacuation

Ok.  So…there are fake bombs.  And there are real bombs.

And there are instances (even within security training) where fake is “preferable”.

And what of government?  And policy?

Wouldn’t there be times when “fake” would be preferable as well?

Say, for instance, that you NEED a “terror attack” at a certain time…to ramp up security levels…to thwart a REAL attack.  So you STAGE a FAKE attack.

But say that MI5 accidentally gave the brown bloke some actual explosive powder, and the drill went live (and the brown asset went dead).

Such happened with the American FBI in 1993…and it was even reported by The New York Times.  The WTC bombing in that year killed six people…all because of LIHOP or MIHOP.  At the very least, gross negligence.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/nyregion/tapes-depict-proposal-to-thwart-bomb-used-in-trade-center-blast.html?pagewanted=all

But let’s take one simple story and analyze it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/23/manchester-arena-attack-22-killed-suicide-bomber-ariana-grande/

Video at top of page shows nothing which corroborates the story of a “bombing”.

Now, into the text itself.

The title:

Manchester Arena attack: 22 killed at Ariana Grande gig by bomber named as Salman Abedi

Ok.

But then the article veers immediately to tangential concerns.

-Britain’s terror threat level

-military personnel may be deployed

-thousands gather for vigil

WHAT ABOUT TELLING US ABOUT THE FUCKING BOMBING…THE EVENT (as any good journalistic service would)?

Ok…bomber…22…Salman Abedi.

“Isil” claim responsibility.

(not very informative)

-an eight-year-old girl was ostensibly killed

ok

Statement by Theresa May (who gives a fuck what she has to say?).

Parents frantically search for kids.

Ok.

Still waiting for some meat and potatoes about how this bloke supposedly pulled this off.

Another man, age 23, arrested in South Manchester.

Worst terror attack in U.K. since July 2005.

Alright.

Queen condemns (fuck the Queen!).

Hashtag of the moment:  #RoomForManchester

Ok…so the social media campaign has started, but all I know from this article is that a 22-year-old is said to have blown himself up in a crowded area.

Ok, the first sentence which is a little wishy-washy:  Abedi is “believed to have been born in Manchester”.

Considering his ID was found at the scene, wouldn’t a clear yes/no be possible by searching for his birth record in UK databases?

Abedi (as I predicted last night) “was reportedly known to the security services”…

Right.  So they can roll out background earlier than had he been an unknown (and not carrying his fucking ID…what a doofus!).

shit

Attended Didsbury Mosque (as I roughly predicted last night).

Again, we don’t know the logistics.

Because this article wants to tell us about the “heartrending” aspects.

All we get, then, are “a home-made device packed with nuts and bolts which exploded in the venue’s foyer as thousands of young people were leaving.”

The first reports I saw last night were of an explosion near or on the stage.

Was that explosion to drive people to the exits?

Or merely to traumatize them?

[or to print their brains with a false memory…which would be filled in by rubbish news coverage]

How did the bomber get inside the arena to place the bomb near the stage?

Was anyone hurt by that bomb?

If the bomber didn’t place it there, who did?

And why?

Was the bomb by the stage remote activated by someone in the crowd…to signal to the crisis actors outside that they needed to take their “places”?

Unknown

Judging by this graphic, it doesn’t seem that either of the two main Entrance/Exits were chosen for this attack.  Nor even the one Exit Only on the far side.  Perhaps there is another exit near the box office (foyer) not marked on this graphic.  But this brings up another point.  Did the whole explosion happen outside?  Or (as we were told) IN THE FOYER.  In other words, did this ostensible gentlemen ever have to enter the building proper?

It would seem that he would have needed to enter at the stage end of the building.  If there were metal detectors in operation, he surely would not have made it through (with all those nuts and bolts).  But supposing he snuck in, then he would have to traverse the length of the building to arrive at a rather unimportant seeming location.

If he was in the building (multiple times?), then why didn’t he go into the arena proper amongst the 20,000 people.  Surely his casualties would have been much higher.

But faking (let’s say) a thousand deaths…in the presence of 19,000 witnesses becomes very difficult.

22 is manageable.

Right out in the foyer.

They could be crisis actors playing dead.  Covered in fake blood.

Or real dead.  Blown up by a small device.

I don’t know, dear friends.

But I’m not buying it.

I’ve scrolled through pictures.

Some seem staged.  And others simply show nothing and are thus neither conclusive one way or the other.

As always, if people died in this event, I am deeply saddened.

And if you want to bring the perpetrators to justice, make sure you have carefully considered the truthfulness of the official story.

May God keep us all safe from the psychopaths who run this world.

-PD

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