Canada’s false flag terror: fingerprints of U.S. involvement

1029 spec memorial 373.JPG

Ottawa police guard war memorial. Ottawa Citizen photo.

By Barrie Zwicker (Special to Truth and Shadows)
THE “TERRORIST” EVENTS of Wednesday October 22nd in Ottawa and two days earlier in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu bear all the hallmarks of a coordinated cross-border one-two punch false flag operation.
The first, the left jab hit-and-run killing of a Canadian soldier, would be the psychological softening up for the follow-up right cross, the killing of another Canadian soldier in Ottawa. Together they dazed the public to an extent that even the ostentatiously-iconic murder at the National War Memorial alone might not have achieved.
The context was within the intensification of the so-called “global war on terror” and in concert with the pro-military Stephen Harper government’s deployment of warplanes supposedly fighting “the terrorists” of the suddenly-emerging “Islamic State.” The first bombing sorties of Canadian F-18s took place hours after the violent acts of supposed “homegrown” and “self-radicalized” supporters of “Islamic jihad.”
Domestically the second outrage occurred on the very day the government was to introduce legislation giving the RCMP, CSIS and CSEC [CSEC is changing its name (to CSE) so that it can continue to spy – and indeed do more spying abroad – but not have the word “Canada” associated with this spying. “Spy agency CSEC says goodbye to Canada” is the headline over an October 31st  Toronto Star story by Tonda MacCharles. ( expanded powers under decreased transparency.]
These coincidences of timing, I submit, are not coincidences at all but quite deliberately planned to maximize the intended impacts: greater public support for a new war in the Middle East, better chances for faster and less-questioned support in Parliament for the increased police and spy powers, and enhanced public approval ratings for the Harper government in the run-up to next year’s general election.
This article delves deeper into the timing including that the events happened, to the day, as military-intelligence “exercises” were taking place that precisely mirrored the “surprise” events. Other hallmarks include the prior involvement of government agents with both of the supposed jihadists, the fact that both were easy-to-manipulate “human wreckage” and the early “terrorism” branding led by the Prime Minister. Other hallmarks include the unfolding parade of memorable iconic elements and images, the “lone wolf” narratives, the dual role of the media in general to both to reinforce the official narrative and to fail to ask fundamental questions about it.
Ottawa shooter Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, especially, is tied to the “war on terror.” At the highest level of visibility, he’s a pawn marketed for public consumption to reinforce “global jihad” rhetoric.
On a subterranean level are two sets of fingerprints. One set shows the involvement of both Canadian and U.S. spy agencies and possibly other of the so-called “Five Eyes” (the others being the UK, Australia and New Zealand), not to mention the grotesquely corrupt FBI, with its record of mounting scores of false flag ops, that will be referred to later.
The second set of prints shows the work of the agencies’ gatekeeper “assets” in the media, in this instance in the USA as well as in Canada. They manipulate “the news.”
Telltale hallmarks of false flag ops
1 The timing. The exquisite timing of the National War Memorial outrage on the very day new laws were to be introduced by the Harper regime giving expanded powers to spook agencies – as well as additional cover for their “informants” so deep as to be impenetrable – is one hallmark of a world-class false flag op.
Added police powers at all times in any country, when an atmosphere of hysteria has been generated, are railroaded into laws in a flash, historically speaking. The new or expanded laws take decades to undo or ratchet down, if they ever are.
As Prof. Graeme MacQueen, author of an insightful and detailed new book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy, (Clarity Press, Inc.,, ISBN 978-0-9860731-2-0; EBOOK 978-0-9860731-3-7) writes, the timing of the 2001 “anthrax letter attacks” or the “anthrax attacks” was just as the USA Patriot Act “was being hurried through Congress.” The notorious bill, propagandistically entitled “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism” Act, was signed into law October 26th, 2001, about three weeks after the first news of an “anthrax attack” broke. Bush followed up by giving his approval “to the first bulk domestic spying by the National Security Agency (NSA).” Such are the sea changes set into motion by perfectly-timed false flag ops. (Watch for an upcoming review of MacQueen’s book in Truth and Shadows.)
Interestingly MacQueen notes that “gradually the hypothesis became widespread that the [anthrax] attacks were the second blow in a ‘one-two punch’ delivered by terrorists, the first blow having been the attacks of 9/11.”
Ottawa has gone the U.S. government one better by compressing the time between introduction of “anti-terror” legislation and a false flag “terror attack” to hours. Ottawa also subjected MPs and others on Parliament Hill to the sounds of gunfire amidst fearful uncertainty, in a fast-moving operation, again outdoing the Americans.
These events have also taken place during the lead-up to Remembrance Day.  Government TV ads are in heavy rotation featuring World War I and World War II footage in black and white and colour, as well as video clips of Canadian peacekeepers. They send us to Stirring and nostalgic, these ads cannot be divorced from consideration of the impact of the Ottawa events. The ads (and much else) knit together in the public consciousness.
My wife and I almost always attend the Remembrance Day ceremonies at Toronto’s Old City Hall. (I posted a piece for this blog about the ceremonies in 2012 ( I tend to agree with predictions that turnout this year may exceed previous years. Remembrance Day speeches, as well as the whole setup of Remembrance Day ceremonies, tend to ennoble if not glorify war. This year the homilies are certain to make reference to the events in St-Jean-sur-Richeleau and Ottawa.
More than ever, this year the understandable sentiments of many will be channeled into reinforcing belief in the “reality” of the “war on terror.” Emotions will be manipulated into support for a militarized monopoly capitalist anti-life system of perpetual war and ever-increasing inequality.
Metrics are being reported that bear this out.  A front-page story in The Globe and Mail on November 7th reports “a steady stream of support for the military in the days leading up to Remembrance Day.”
Under the headline “Poppy sales a sign support for military surging after attacks,” Tristan Simpson reports. “Legion officials say those events have become emblematic of a renewed patriotism – and have sparked an increase in military support.”
2 Prior “involvement” of agents of the state
“Prior contact” with alleged terrorists is a virtually guaranteed hallmark of false flag ops.
Both Zehaf-Bibeau and hit-and-run killer Martin Couture-Rouleau were “known to authorities.” As the main front page headline of the Toronto Star had it of Couture-Rouleau on October 22nd: “RCMP had suspect on their radar for months.”
On page A4 on the next day in the same paper, an edition dominated by 17 pages of coverage out of Ottawa, is a half-page devoted to how much “a Canadian security source” knew about Zehaf-Bibeau’s past.
The usual phraseology is that agents of CSIS or the RCMP “had been in contact with” the criminals or “had (these individuals) under surveillance” or “had been monitoring their activities.”
Is it entirely coincidental that both “terrorists” – as Harper labeled both early and often – were Quebeckers? Quebeckers as a generality are cool to Harper and his “war on terror” rhetoric. But they might be expected to warm up to his “national security” agenda on the basis of fear — insofar as they buy the official narratives.
Canadian authorities, it was reported, asked the FBI to assist in the investigation of the “terrorist” events in Canada. The FBI’s record shows that the assistance would most likely be in sharing with their buddies north of the border in the finer points of how to mount a false flag op. Investigative reporter Trevor Aaronson’s book The Terror Factory exposes the FBI’s inside role in creating “false flag terror.”
He writes that as of 2011 the FBI was involved in more than 500 cases of “manufactured” terror. References here can be found at…ainst-america/
In a 2011 article in Mother Jones, Aaronson wrote:

Since 9/11, there have been hundreds of arrests of “terrorist suspects” and 158 prosecutions. Of all the reported “major terror plots,” only three can’t be directly tied to terror suspects who were directly recruited, trained and supplied by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Truth is, we also have questions about the other three.

In the case of the “anthrax attacks” the spider web of government agents and suspicious civilian players interacting with those initially put forward as anthrax terrorists and/or 9/11 “hijackers” was almost monolithic. Most were in Florida, within close geographic proximity. As MacQueen writes:

Academic researchers have largely tended to dismiss the Florida connections by accepting the FBI’s coincidence theory. … The question, however, is not whether actual hijackers were involved in sending out letters laden with anthrax spores: the question is whether fictions, verbal or enacted, were intentionally created to make this narrative seem credible. The [alleged hijackers] did not have anthrax, but the script portrayed them as likely to have it. [page 138]

The U.S. government repeatedly attempted to link the “anthrax attacks,” the “9/11 hijackers” and Iraq (remember Colin Powell’s now totally discredited dog-and-pony show at the UN?). But when those attempts fell apart, the domestic terror purveyors turned to Plan B, as MacQueen persuasively shows. Plan B was to finger a domestic “lone wolf,” scientist Bruce Ivins, who then became conveniently dead.
“The evidence suggests a grand plan, not an opportunistic foray,” writes MacQueen.
3 The chosen miscreants are “human wreckage”
It was Webster Tarpley, author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA who described the typical patsy recruited for manipulation by spy agencies as “human wreckage.”
It’s easy to understand how such individuals can easily be manipulated through bribes, other inducements, threats or psychological pressure up to and including sophisticated brain-washing techniques. These are known to have been developed by “spy” agencies over decades and in this country go back at least to the CIA’s self-admitted funding of “psychic driving” experiments under the Project MK-Ultra mind control program on unknowing civilians at McGill University from 1957 to 1964 under the direction of Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron (
Frequently mentally-disturbed people have been in trouble with the law. This was true of Zehaf-Bibeau and Couture-Rouleau. Zehaf-Bibeau was desperate, on the edge, unpredictable, wanted to die. Spy agencies find such people easily. The “chosen ones” will have Arabic names and be converts to Islam. Or have Middle East connections. Many combinations fill the bill to help the label “suspected terrorist” stick.
Run-ins with the law render disturbed individuals additionally vulnerable. Police or “intelligence” agents can promise to use their influence to gain shorter sentences if they’ve been convicted, more leniency if they’ve already been sentenced. Or get them off altogether. Conversely agents can threaten to use their influence to make things much worse for these individuals. Those promising or threatening often are in a position to deliver.
In this connection, the lead article (  in the Focus section of The Globe and Mail on October 25th by Doug Saunders actually describes, without his using the term, false flag ops by U.S. “authorities.”
It’s worth excerpting that section of his piece:

Authorities in the U.S. adopted the practice of catching lone-wolf figures in sting operations, in which they’d find disturbed young men online, provide them with prefabricated terror plots and (fake) weapons, and arrest them a moment before they were about to carry out their planned attack. This approach has been numerically successful – that is, it has intercepted a lot of putative terrorists – but many wonder if it’s simply making the problem worse, and turning police agencies into terrorism enablers.
“Often these are down-and-out losers in society who wouldn’t be able to pull off a decent attack on their own,” Dr. [Ramon] Spaaij, an Australian scholar with Victoria University and author of Understanding Lone Wolf Terrorism, says, “but the undercover police provide the weapons and suggest the targets … what that does is it has sown a lot of bad blood in Muslim communities – we’re out there preying on vulnerable young people and turning them into terrorists.”

What Saunders, whose body of work I happen to greatly admire, fails to note is that these “sting” (e.g., false flag) operations generate thousands of fear-inducing headlines; this may be their main purpose. Readers, listeners and viewers are led to believe that police have caught “real terrorists.” These false flag ops contribute the bulk of the “proof” for the so-called “war on terror.” It’s a continuous psychological assault and distortion of reality through manufacture of “reality.” The impact goes ‘way beyond “sowing bad blood in Muslim communities.” It’s a main driver of the fictional “war on terror.”
Besides, “bad blood” in Muslim communities would be one of the goals of the authors of this continuous fakery. This “bad blood” would fulfill at least two functions. One is to keep many Muslims in docile fear mode in which they can be more easily controlled. Second is that less docile Muslims, especially young unstable men, will react with anger and possibly go off the deep end. Perfect.
This is the same entrapment technique used to create the “Toronto 18.” And this is the same modus operandi the police use when they enable or program or bribe or threaten their patsies to cause violence.
As University of Guelph professor Michael Keefer wrote:

The theatrical arrests of 18 (mostly young) Muslims in Toronto in the Summer of 2006 reinforced media-driven paranoia that homegrown terrorists were everywhere. The unraveling of the case two years later exposes to view yet again the sinister and disgraceful behavior of Canada’s security intelligence apparatus, which has formed a habit of confecting false accusations of terrorism against Canadian citizens. The threat to Canadian society is not a bunch of Muslim boys playing paintball, it’s an ideologically driven government willing to curtail our civil liberties.

4 The “lone wolf” or “lone gunman” narrative
Without doubt there are instances of demented individuals who perform outrages single handedly. The USA provides the most examples by far, with a plethora of berserk gunmen mowing down innocent citizens in malls, on college campuses and elsewhere.
In politically-charged false flag ops, by definition in virtually all cases agents in the shadows pull the levers to bring about the outrages. In the three highest profile assassinations of the last century and arguably most impactful historically, those of JFK, RFK and MLK, the establishment narrative has been that lone gunmen were responsible, in each case in the face of much evidence to the contrary. Lee Harvey Oswald was known to have worked for U.S. intelligence. He’s a classic “lone gunman” who wasn’t. Others include James Earl Ray, allegedly the killer of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who wasn’t, as proven in a civil trial in Memphis in 1999. The half white half black jury returned a verdict that civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. was the victim of an assassination conspiracy involving the CIA and the U.S. Army and did not die at the hands of an unaided lone gunman.
In the case of Zehaf-Bibeau the likelihood of enablers is rendered very high because of many unanswered questions. Among them, how did a deranged misfit living in shelters obtain both a gun and a car needed for him to go on his rampage?
5 “Lone wolves” tend to become quickly deceased
From Lee Harvey (“I am just a patsy”) Oswald to Rolando Galman (who gunned down Benigno Aquino, Jr., former Philippine Senator, as he stepped off his plane, and then himself was gunned down) to “Boston bomber” Tamerlan Tsarnaev, patsies or hired assassins tend to become deceased – quickly. Dead men tell no tales. Typically, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau and Martin Couture-Rouleau are no more.
In 2002 U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft named scientist Steven Hatfill a “person of interest” in connection with the “anthrax attacks” of a year before. As Graeme MacQueen writes: “The FBI concentrated on investigating him, publicly and aggressively. A year later Hatfill sued the Justice Department for libel and eventually he received $5.82 million in compensation…”
The FBI – presumably after a massive search for patsy material – decided in 2008 that the “anthrax killer” was Dr. Bruce Ivins, who had been working on an anthrax vaccine at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Maryland.
“This time,” MacQueen writes, “the FBI faced no serious challenge from its chosen perpetrator because Ivins died shortly before he was to be charged with the crime. He was said to have committed suicide.” Tellingly, no autopsy was performed.
The death of an actual bona fide terrorist or, much more often the case, a recruited patsy (the classic being Oswald) obviates the possibility of a trial in a court of law (as distinguished from trial in the “court of public opinion”). Trial in a court of law carries with it the possibility of evidence emerging that could be damning to the state and the Crown’s case.
The bodies of killers, alleged killers or dead “terrorists” frequently are not dealt with appropriately. As Prof. John McMurtry of Guelph, author of The Cancer Stage of Capitalism: From Crisis to Cure, wrote in an October 29th essay: Zehaf-Bibeau “…went on a killing spree, with no known blood testing afterwards for the drugs he was evidently driven by, in the video record of his frenzied and super-charged behaviour, just as there was no known test of the body of crazed drive-over killer, Martin Couture-Rouleau. How extraordinary. How unspoken in the lavish profusion of other details… All such strange coincidences are part of the now familiar covert-state MO.”
The de facto executions of the killers or alleged killers are, however, less a necessity than a convenience to the national security state. This is because in those cases where the patsies, killers or alleged killers survive, their trials uniformly are fixed, as was the case with the “Toronto 18,” who rapidly became the Toronto nine, as charges were dropped against many of the teenaged “terror suspects.”
6 The branding
The St-Jean-sur-Richelieu events were instantly defined as “terrorism” by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the House of Commons and thereafter were widely so defined by the military, by “intelligence experts,” RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson and by many media players. (There are honourable exceptions to the general rush to judgment within the media. We identify some later.)
The “anthrax attacks,” MacQueen writes, “were the result of a [domestic] conspiracy meant to help redefine the enemy of the West, revising the global conflict framework from the Cold War to the Global War on Terror.”
The events in Ottawa were not meant to replace the global-conflict framework but rather to reinforce the new 2001 model: “Islam” as the permanent mortal enemy of “the West.”
The rhetoric, like ad copy, is part and parcel of the branding.
Buzzwords (“war on terror,”), code words (“national security”), snarl words (“terrorists,” “radical Islam,” “threats”) and purr words (“our allies,” “security”) as semanticist S. I. Hayakawa dubbed them, displace rational thought.
Equal in impact to that of language repetition, if not greater, were the iconic elements. The National War Memorial and Parliament are about as iconic as one can arrange in Canada. So to have the shooter start at one, then skedaddle over to the other on the same crazed mission is to do so on iconosteroids.
Add to that: two worthy soldiers representing Everyman, all Members of Parliament, the Prime Minister, a car-jacked driver, a hero in the person of the gun-toting Sergeant-at-Arms, the heart-wrenching footage of Corporal Cirillo’s five-year-old son wearing his father’s regimental hat, the corporal’s pet dogs, the grieving spouses and relatives and more.
It would be a mistake to overlook that the flesh and blood victims, Corporal Cirillo and Warrant Office Patrice Vincent, also were symbolic. They represent “Canada’s military,” “our men and women in uniform” who “serve our country” who “made the ultimate sacrifice.”
Many of the iconic themes of October 22nd were pre-echoed in the Toronto 18 trials, one of them being the alleged planning by the teen-aged patsies and dupes of “blowing up Parliament” and “beheading the prime minister.”
7 “Security exercises” and the false flag curiously overlap
A hallmark of false flag ops is that military, security, police or “intelligence” exercises precede or run simultaneously with a false flag operation. Run-throughs are necessary for all complex maneuvers. A drill also justifies assembling the human and other resources required.
Perhaps the most egregious exercise was the one admitted to be taking place at the time of the “London 7/7” tube “terror bombings” of July 7th, 2007. Peter Power, managing director of crisis management for the firm Visor Consultants, in a live interview on ITV News that was aired at 8:20 p.m. on the evening of the bombings, tells the host “…today we were running an exercise …. 1,000 people involved in the whole organization … and the most peculiar thing was that we based our scenario on simultaneous attacks on the underground and mainland station and so we had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real.” Elsewhere he said the exercise specified the same stations that the “surprise bombers” targeted, which would qualify as one of the most far-fetched coincidences of all time.
On the day of 9/11 a minimum of five military drills were underway. One of them, Vigilant Guardian, involved the insertion of false radar blips onto radar screens in the Northeast Air Defense Sector, a fact that even made it into the fraudulent 9/11 Commission Report (although the others did not, which made the appearance of Vigilant Guardian a limited hangout).
All of which is relevant to what Mark Taliano wrote about the events in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa on the Global Research website on October 31st: “The theory that U.S agencies were somehow implicated in the [Ottawa] tragedy is further reinforced by … Operation Determined Dragon, a joint Canada/U.S counter-terrorism drill…” (
The first Canadian event, the fatal hit-and-run carried out by Couture-Rouleau, occurred on the first day of that drill, October 20th. From that day to 29th was the “execution phase” of a joint Canada-U.S.-NATO military-intelligence “linked exercise” named Determined Dragon 14 (in internal documents called “Ex DD 14”).
For details of Determined Dragon 14 one need look no further than the National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces website (
“Ex DD 14 will primarily focus on the lateral interface between NORAD, United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) and United States Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) specifically in cyber and space domains,” visitors to the site are informed.

Among the strategic objectives specified on the are to “enhance interagency partnerships” and to “institutionalize battle procedures with partners such as regional and component commanders, the Strategic Joint Staff, the Associate Deputy Minister (Policy), and the Canadian Forces Intelligence Command.” Another is to enhance “bilateral planning with USNORTHCOM and USSTRATCOM; and CJOC coordination with NORAD.

Under the heading “Linked Exercises” the Canadian site says that Ex DD 14 “is bound to other allied exercises by a common scenario and linked through multiple events:

  • Ex VIGILANT SHIELD, a NORAD-USNORTHCOM exercise focused on homeland defence and homeland security missions; and
  • Ex GLOBAL THUNDER, a USSTRATCOM-led exercise with the primary emphasis on exercising nuclear command and control capabilities.

It concludes that Ex DD 14 “offers an opportunity for regional joint task forces (RJTF) to leverage their own exercises.
For someone paying close attention to CBC-TV’s The National on October 25th, CBC senior correspondent Adrienne Arsenault came close to giving away the game. Anchor Peter Mansbridge begins by saying there are “lots of questions” about the day’s events. After he hears the usual line from regularly seen Ray Boisvert, “ex-CSIS,” Mansbridge turns to Arsenault, “who’s been looking at this whole issue of radicalization for the past year or so” and asks her what she can say. Arsenault replies:

They [Canadian authorities] may have been surprised by the actual incidents but not by the concepts of them. Within the last month we know that the CSIS, the RCMP and the National Security Task Force engaged in, I suppose they, ran a scenario that’s akin to a war games exercise if you will where they actually imagined literally an attack in Quebec, followed by an attack in another city, followed by a tip that that “hey some guys, some foreign fighters are coming back from Syria.” So they were imagining a worst case scenario. We’re seeing elements of that happening right now. … [Canadian authorities] may talk today in terms of being surprised but we know that this precise scenario has been keeping them up at night for awhile.” [my emphasis]

Mansbridge shows no interest in this remarkable statement by his senior correspondent.
But truth activist Josh Blakeney of the University of Lethbridge ( who also was one of the first out of the block in nailing these events as false flags, comments:

What an amazing coincidence that Canadian intelligence ran a drill envisioning an attack first in Quebec, then another city. What are the chances that these mock terror drills are just a coincidence? In nearly every instance of a major terrorist occurrence in the West, it has been revealed that intelligence services were conducting war games exercises mimicking the very events that later come to pass. And now we have confirmation that Canada’s intelligence services were doing the same thing.

All of which would seem to reflect adequate “information exchanges” with “our U.S. partner” and other “allies.” Yet Harper’s new “anti-terror” legislation will merge Canadian spooks and military even more into the global apparatus that can manufacture terror incidents pretty well anywhere any time.
8 Media manipulation on both sides of the border
On the crucial propaganda front the evidence is that “U.S. officials” initiated journalistic input, and government agents planted within the media on both sides of the border meddled with journalistic output.
Key mainstream media stories as well as tweets “disappeared.” Stories disappeared from Google. Both U.S. and Canadian mainstream reports were altered significantly. This could only be carried out by internal gatekeeper agents. Inputs and outputs left permanent fingerprints of the overt as well as behind-the-scenes manipulation.
Students of false flag operations have learned – just as regular detectives have learned in regard to standard non-political crimes – the first 24 or 48 hours provide critical evidence, before the criminals can begin covering their tracks.
Amy MacPherson of Free The Press Canada ( hit the ground running in those first hours and days. On Tuesday, October 23rd she posted a lengthy piece, carried the next day on GlobalResearch ( containing damning evidence of rolling censorship on social media including Twitter and in mainstream media including the Toronto Star and the CBC.
Equally if not more damning are her frame grabs showing that U.S. news outlets were fed information by “U.S. officials” identifying Zehaf-Bibeau as the Ottawa shooter prematurely, before Canadian media were able to identify him.
With accompanying grabs, MacPherson writes: “While Canadian news personalities were at police gunpoint, American outlets like CBS News and the [always suspect] Associated Press had a full story to sell, complete with the dead shooter’s name.”
At 10:54 a.m. Eastern, when the National War Memorial crime scene was not yet secured, CBS News stated: “The gunmen [sic] has been identified by U.S. officials to CBS News as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a Canadian national born in 1982.” MP Charlie Angus described gunshots around 10 a.m. American media had solved the murder 54 minutes later.
“By 4:58 p.m.” MacPherson notes, “the [CBS] story was edited to remove the shooter’s name, or any mention of the U.S. government’s knowledge.” She continues: “The only problem is no one could update the Google database quick enough with these changes, so the original information still appeared with general search results.
“The story was altered again in the evening, when the Canadian government allowed [her emphasis] the name of a shooter to be released and American media added law enforcement to their list of official sources.  They also added a middle name, Abdul, to emphasize the suspect’s Islamic ties with an accusation of terrorism.”
She asks: “…how American intelligence knew the name of a ‘possible terrorist’ as the mayhem was still unfolding. How did Americans know when Canadians didn’t, and how was this information so widespread that American media and Google had access to distribute, but domestic reporters on the scene did not?
“Canadian parliamentary bureau chiefs didn’t possess the same information as their U.S. counterparts and faced the barrel of police guns as a press narrative was provided on their behalf by another country. If this is dubbed an act of terrorism that American sources had knowledge about to pre-report, then why weren’t steps taken to prevent the violence?”
Then there are the all-Canadian media anomalies. “The Toronto Star reported [that] multiple witnesses saw [Couture-Rouleau] with his hands in the air,” writes MacPherson, “when at least one police officer opened fire. They also say a knife was ‘lodged into the ground near where the incident occurred.’
“Well,” MacPherson continues, “that’s what the original story by Allan Woods, Bruce Campion-Smith, Joanna Smith, Tonda MacCharles and Les Whittington stated. A syndicated copy had to be located at the Cambridge Times, because a newer, edited version at the Toronto Star appeared dramatically altered by Tuesday.”
That article (changed without disclosure) claims Couture-Rouleau was an Islamic radical who emerged from the vehicle with a knife in his hands. No mention of eyewitnesses who saw his hands in the air and the knife lodged in the ground (an image seen later on CBC-TV news).
As MacPherson writes: “The article was more than edited and qualifies as being replaced entirely, having lost its tone, facts and spirit from the original published version.
If it weren’t for smaller papers carrying The Star’s original syndicated content, there would be little or no proof of the first comprehensive version, she adds.
9 Failure of media to ask fundamental questions
These include, first and foremost: “Is it possible that agents of the state had a hand in this outrage?” This question might not be as difficult to raise as one might imagine. Suppose it were handled this way:
“There’s a long and well-documented history of authorities staging iconic events aimed at stampeding their publics into supporting government initiatives, especially initiatives supporting existing or proposed wars. Examples include Colin Powell’s introduction at the United Nations of alleged compelling proof – subsequently proven false – that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. [pause] Can it be ruled out definitively that behind-the-scenes actors in government circles in Canada had no hand whatsoever in the events of October 22nd?”
Of course, for any media person to ask such a question would pre-suppose that those who reach the level of Parliamentary correspondent or, higher still, anchor of a national news program would have developed deep skepticism based on hard-won knowledge of the history of such operations.
It would further pre-suppose that, had they developed such a grasp of history, they would be promoted to those levels.
What can we say? We can say: “These things ain’t going to happen.”
Tihe “failure” to ask fundamentally important fully justified questions based on documented history known to many readers, listeners and viewers deserves extensive treatment in itself. The “failure” represents, from the point of view of a cover-up, success for the real perpetrators.
Such unasked questions are masked by the repetitive posing of essentially superficial questions and questions that beg answers. Press conferences are rife with the acceptance of the official line along with questions about minutiae within the line. One also hears a lot of really dumb and repetitive questions.
The graphically impressive front page of The Globe and Mail had it on October 23rd: “The murder of Corporal Nathan Cirillo, the storming of Parliament and the tough questions [my emphasis] arising from the chaos.”
The phrase “tough questions” in this context suggests – and their subsequent rollout reinforces – a central theme that buttresses the official line: that there have been “security lapses,” that these lapses are serious, that therefore “security agencies” need “more resources” to do their jobs “protecting our security” and “making us safe,” and so on and on.
Included among the questions most frequently trotted out by the media: “How can we strike a balance between “the need for greater security” on the one hand, and “the protection of privacy,” on the other.
This endlessly posed question has embedded within it several unexamined major premises, concealed significant historical facts and trends, as well as an ambiguity serving both concealments and that drives conclusions among readers, listeners and viewers that are ill-based, self-defeating and that inoculate those who are so manipulated against gaining greater understanding.
The premises include that privacy is ever and always a stand-alone good; that every person’s privacy is at risk equally with every other person’s; that privacy for each person or group means the same as for every other person or group; that in fact the two sides of the equation are security vs. privacy (as opposed, for instance, to security vs. freedom, although that equation – much more relevant – is raised fairly frequently) and that it is the good-faith activities of “security forces” that endanger “privacy.” Left out of the equation are the proven bad faith activities of “security forces.”
The concealments include that the threat to citizens can come from the good-faith actions of “security forces,” yes, but that in fact by a large preponderance come from rogue actions of “security forces” and “intelligence agencies,” both of which are virtually out-of-control now.
On protecting the identity of “intelligence sources
The historical record – not in the slightest acknowledged by the “security vs privacy” equation – shows conclusively that those most spied upon, whose personal security is threatened repeatedly, are those who question authority, those who are peaceful dissidents, those who seek and act for improvements to the status quo, specifically for more equality and justice, those who are left-of-centre up to and including revolutionaries. The danger posed to loss of privacy among those on the left is much greater than it is for those on the right or for those not politically involved at all, which is to say the vast majority of citizens. This historical record goes unaddressed in 99% or more of the discourse about the dangers of “loss of privacy.”
The large majority of people have little reason to fear the state, because they pose no perceived threat to the state. Accordingly, their need or wish to protect their privacy – for instance about their personal sex or financial lives – is of less interest to, is far less important to, the national security state than are the personal facts and political beliefs or acts of those on the left who pose a perceived threat to the status quo, however lawful or justified their words or actions may be.
Providing deeper, almost impenetrable, cover for informants, otherwise known colloquially as rats or ratfinks, is far from a pressing need for national security.
Rather, the history of informants shows that the majority, and in particular those who are chosen or come forward to “intelligence” agencies (or are assigned by these agencies), are owed much less protection from identity than they even now enjoy.
The case of RCMP informant Richard Young is just one that should give pause.
Young was recruited by the RCMP in British Columbia (he approached them) prior to 2007. He convinced them he had information on drug operations. An accomplished con man, he suckered the Mounties big time.
While they, through failure to carry out due diligence among other things, came under his spell he was taken under their witness protection program. Doing so is labour intensive and expensive. Under it, Young committed a murder, which is uncontested. The Mounties then did all in their considerable power to shield him from the consequences of that. This and more was documented by two CanWest reporters and then a Globe and Mail investigative team in 2007.
At the heart of the stupidity, naivete and wrong-doing by the RCMP was the continued insistence on protecting Young’s identity. Ultimately the Mounties’ failure and the harm done (wasted public money, a man getting away with murder under the protection of the RCMP, and the RCMP not properly held to account) were exposed by less than a handful of dedicated reporters.
A compelling but illegitimate reason for these agencies to seek total anonymity for their “informants” is that so many of these do not even qualify as such, but rather are individuals planted to manufacture false “intelligence” or carry out dirty tricks on targets chosen by these agencies. Documented history shows that typically the targets are law-abiding, well-informed, politically active (on the left) and even courageous citizens who nevertheless are considered “enemies of the state” by the security apparatus and its overlords.
Remember that the RCMP spied on Tommy Douglas to the extent that his dossier numbered 1,100 pages, only a few of which CSIS, which inherited the RCMP dossier, has released. The grounds for CSIS’s refusal are that it must protect the informants. This is the very group of unsavoury snitches that the Harper government wants to give deeper cover.
The otherwise much-touted need for transparency and accountability is not only forgotten within “terrorist threat” hysteria. It is turned on its head. It is claimed that transparency and accountability are threats to the public! And that anyone who suggests otherwise also is a threat. In a world of fear the good becomes bad and the bad becomes good.
The so-called “war on terror,” fed by the national security state to the public like slops to pigs, paves the way through regression to a world of “military tribunals” (an oxymoron), of Star Chambers, to a new Dark Ages.
Outcomes of this particular false flag op
√ It makes the task much harder for those warning the public of the dangers of the government’s legislation endowing intelligence agencies with greater powers, more resources, fewer restrictions and less transparency.
√ Providing the RCMP and other spy agencies with even more anonymity for informants is a particular danger, as noted at length above.
If the laws being pushed by Harper today go through, the RCMP, CSIS or CSEC in a similar case in the future would be even more enabled to waste the time of personnel and of other resources, and of taxpayer public money, for little or no gain in public safety or security.
√ Reduction of civil liberties:  easier detentions, extraditions
√ Increased invasion of privacy
√ Intimidation of legislative branch, as happened in spades in the USA in response to the “anthrax attacks.”
√ More pressure on the judiciary to bow to omnipresent low-level “terrorism” hysteria
√ Marginalizing of both the legislative and judicial branches
Increased integration of Canadian spy agencies with those
of “our” allies, so that the globalist integrated deception apparatus can operate even more freely and in ever more sophisticated ways.
√ Buttressing of the grand made-in-Washington pax Americana imperial design.
Honourable exceptions in the media
In fairness, quite a number of voices of reason, caution, skepticism and outright objection to the Harper government’s obvious exploitation of the events of the week of October 20th to forward its militaristic pro-American pro-Israeli agenda could be found. Unfortunately, as usual with false flags, these voices accepted the government’s version of what happened.
With this fundamental caveat in place, however, here are just a few individuals within the Canadian mainstream who made cogent arguments of dissent.
In the Toronto’s Star’s 17 pages of coverage on October 23rd Martin Regg Cohn cautioned: “The risk is that we will overreact with security clampdowns and lockdowns that are difficult to roll back when the threat subsides. The greater risk is that we will hunker down with over-the-top security precautions that pose a more insidious menace to our open society.” Tom Walkom pointed out the events were not unprecedented. In 1984 a disgruntled Canadian Forces corporal killed three and wounded 13 in Quebec’s national assembly. “We know,” Walkom continued, “that in a situation like this, facts are secondary,” and “at times like this, it is easy to lose all sense of proportion.” Haroon Siddiqui asked why, “if Martin Rouleau, a.k.a. Ahmad the Convert,” was in the crosshairs of CSIS and the RCMP for months, he was not being tailed. “Smoking out such suspects and throwing the book at them requires good policing, not wars abroad or the whipping up of fears at home for partisan political purposes.”
On October 27th in The Globe and Mail Elizabeth Renzetti quoted extensively from James Risen’s new book, Pay Any Price: Greed, Power and Endless War. “The war in question is the war on terror, which Mr. Risen, a Pulitzer-Prize winning security reporter for The New York Times, says has been used as an excuse to conduct a largely secret campaign to undermine Americans’ civil rights, spy on their communications and line the pockets of security consultants. As one reviewer said, it reads like a thriller – except, unfortunately, it’s not fiction.”
She quotes Risen: “Of all the abuses America has suffered at the hands of the government in its endless war on terror,” Mr. Risen writes, “possibly the worst has been the war on truth.”
On the same day in the Toronto Star Tim Harper wrote: “Here’s a vote for the power of time and perspective.” “And here’s a vote of confidence in a Parliament that will not jump to conclusions in the heat of the moment and a government that will resist the temptation to use October’s events as an impetus to move into new, unneeded realms.” “Before we move too far, time and perspective should force us to ask whether we were dealing with mental health issues last week rather than terrorism, even as the RCMP said Sunday it had ‘persuasive evidence’ that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau’s attack was driven by ideological and political motives.” “We must twin increased powers with increased oversight.”
On November 2nd, the Toronto Star published a long lead editorial headed “’Terrorism’ Debate: Get beyond the word.”
The second paragraph: “Down one path is a U.S.-like response to the perceived, though unsubstantiated, threat of terror: increased police powers and indiscriminate state snooping, the chipping away of civil liberties. This the way of the government.”
Down the other “is a more considered, deliberate approach that takes the rule of law as primary…” The choice, the editorial continues “ought to be fertile ground for a pivotal public debate but so far that conversation has been eclipsed by a lexicographical matter: whether we can rightly call the attack on Ottawa ‘terrorism.’”
It concludes: “As long as our leaders insist on reducing these complex issues to a binary debate over a slippery word, we cannot have the conversation we need nor choose the country we’ll become.”
Many writers of letters to the editors of these papers are in no mood to be panicked by inflated “terror” talk. “Denying [Zihaf-Bibeau and Couture-Rouleau] their passports had the equivalent effect of putting them in cages and poking at them with a sharp stick. They broke out and two soldiers are dead.” This was from a retired RCMP officer, in The Globe and Mail.
False flag events benefit the Canadian right
Some commentators to their credit have observed that these events as played are calculated to pay off domestically to increase the Harper government’s chances of re-election next year.
Harper now holds a couple of aces for a winning electoral hand. One is his rightwing anti-taxes stance tied to producing a federal money surplus whatever the cost to the environment, science, social services (including more help for the mentally ill) and more. Some of that surplus is already being earmarked in the highest-profile ways as bribes (with their own money) to Canadians with children.
Last week’s events now constitute another ace. “Family-friendly” leaders seen as standing tall against an external enemy almost always benefit electorally. But this second ace is a fixed card. In this game there are five aces: clubs, spades, hearts, diamonds and false flags.
Only when a politically relevant portion of Canada’s and the world’s people understand the dominant agenda-setting function of false flag operations can decent people the world over begin a successful effort to replace the vast global inequality-and-death structure with a life-sustaining and fair socio-economic structure.
As Prof. John McMurtry of Guelph put it on October 29th in an essay entitled “Canada: Decoding Harper’s Terror Game. Beneath the Masks and Diversions” posted at Global Research ( “If the stratagem is not seen through, the second big boost to Harper will be to justify the despotic rule and quasi-police state he has built with ever more prisons amidst declining crime, ever more anti-terrorist rhetoric and legislation, ever more cuts to life support systems and protections (the very ones which would have prevented these murderous rampages), and ever more war-mongering and war-criminal behaviours abroad.
Adds McMurtry: “Harper rule can only go further by such trances of normalized stupefaction now reinforced with Canadian blood.”


  1. Forget the complicated conspiracy stuff, this is just a case for the urgent need for some common sense gun control and strict background checks.

    1. I arise from the web-grave to dispute your conformist assertions here Painter. If you want to dismiss “complicated conspiracy stuff”, you are at the wrong establishment.
      9/11 obviously did nothing to wake your dreamy ass up.

    2. The only reason “conspiracy stuff” is complicated is because the perpetrators want to deceive us with a whole fake cover story. Also, the absence of help from the mainstream media means that all the work has to be done by independent researchers. Obviously deceptions of this magnitude will be complicated. This article by Barrie is a terrific addition to our understanding of how this bit of theater was perpetrated.

    3. Paid shill or lobotomized fool?
      You did not address any of the content that you did not even read. You’re a joke.
      By “common sense gun control” that you parrot do you mean disarming the police and military which exist to protect the private central banking cartel’s tax slavery and force it on to the rest of the world by killing whoever stands in their way?
      And arming of the citizens so they are not defenseless powerless serfs with no rights?
      People like you that have no idea what you’re talking about, don’t want to know what you’re talking about, and are too lazy to know what you’re talking about should really stop talking.

    4. Painter,
      Yes gun control was the agenda behind the Sandy Hook false flag operation as well. I personally am delighted that it backfired in a big big way. I am even more delighted that Sandy Hook has been completely exposed now as a false flag event. If gun control proves to be one of the goals of the perpetrators of this event in Canada then I respectfully suggest my brothers and sisters to the north do what Americans did in droves after Sandy Hook and buy a gun and learn how to use it.
      The pro gun control argument is untenable for a number of very good reasons not the least of which is the fact that criminals (who are the ones we don’t want to have guns) do not obey laws! Think about it and ask yourself who the real target of gun control is. The US Constitution 2nd amendment (The right to keep and bear arms) is there for the express purpose of making sure the people can defend themselves against a government gone mad.
      “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” – Mao Zedong (Greatest mass murderer in history.)

      1. Not to mention the symbiotic relationship between the 1st and 2nd amendments.
        Without the 2nd, there is no 1st… And, without the 1st, the 2nd shall fall… Which is exactly where we stand at the moment, since they have punched gaping holes in both…

    5. “Forget the complicated conspiracy stuff?” Excellent idea, and excellent suggestion for activists who wish to educate the world on grand conspiracies against humanity.
      Accordingly, by all means, do forget the complicated conspiracy stuff. Start with the simple conspiracy stuff. Ponder the uncomplicated paradox that Building 7’s destruction resembled very much a controlled demolition yet could only result from office fires. You’ll get soon enough to the complicated conspiracy stuff.

      1. Acutely said, Dan, however, newbies new to the game need to understand the over arching patterns of false flags and hoaxes, then need to be presented with them one by one. The devil is in the details and it’s not complicated if presented in a logical matter.

    6. After reading this article you are either a paid shill or a moron. Even the brainwashed are starting to see the false flags that have been increasingly used to take peoples freedom through the use of fear and that not always but many times innocent people die as a result of their own government attacking them. But by all means keep preaching how you will be safer when that same government restricts your right to protect yourself from them. Idiot!

    1. Mr Goldstein mentions a “court of law” …Lol
      What “law”? Who owns the “courts of law”?
      If Goldstein wishes to live in the world he observes rather than the one he is being told of, he should begin by opening his eyes to the facts of that world; government is a racket, and it owns the courts, the media, and obviously Mr Goldstein’s mind.

      1. LAW
        Law is fiction. It is a fictional language. It only applies to fictitious entities, such as; corporations, states, persons, citizens, etc…
        Of course human beings are lassoed hog-tied and forced into submission to the state at birth. You even get a ‘certification’ of such!
        Government is a racket. Law is the Rule of the racketeers.
        That’s right folks; There’s no business like bullshit – it’s the only game in town
        [Also see: Lysander Spooner]
        A contract is not binding until signed by the parties it pertains to. It is asserted that a ‘constitution’ is exempt from this stipulation, that it is a special form of contract. But this assertion is given no valid reasoning. Indeed there are reams of rhetoric attending this matter, but that which promotes the concept of a constitution having a reasonable and legitimate foundation all fail. A general understanding can be in error, and such is the case in this matter of constitutions.

    2. The law never feigns what is impossible. Fiction is like art; it imitates nature, but never disfigures it. It aids truth, but it ought never to destroy it. It may well suppose that what was possible, but which does not exist; but it will never feign that what was impossible actually is.
      Fictions were invented by the Roman praetors who, not possessing the power to abrogate the law, were nevertheless willing to derogate from it under the pretense of doing equity. Fiction is the resource of weakness which, in order to obtain its object, assumes as a fact what is known to be contrary to truth: when the legislator desires to accomplish his object, he need not feign, he commands. Fictions of law owe their origin to the legislative usurpations of the bench.
      It is said that every fiction must be framed according to the rules of law, and that every legal fiction must have equity for its object. To prevent their evil effects, they are not allowed to be carried further than the reasons which introduced them necessarily require.
      The law abounds in fictions. That an estate is in abeyance; the doctrine of remitter, by which a party who has been disseised of his freehold and afterwards acquires a defective title, is remitted to his former good title; that one thing done today, is considered as done at a preceding time by the doctrine of relation; that because one thing is proved, another shall be presumed to be true, which is the case in all presumptions; that the heir, executor, and administrator stand by representation in the place of the deceased are all fictions of law. “Our various introduction of John Doe and Richard Roe; our solemn process upon dissension by Hugh Hunt; our casually losing and finding a ship (which never was in Europe) in the parish of St. Mary Le Bow, in the ward of Cheap; our trying the validity of a will by an imaginary wager of five pounds; our imagining and compassing the king’s death, by giving information which may defeat an attack upon an enemy’s settlement in the antipodes; our charge of picking a pocket or forging a bill with force and arms; of neglecting to repair a bridge, against the peace of the king, his crown and dignity are circumstances, which, looked at by themselves, would convey an impression of no very favorable nature, with respect to the wisdom of our jurisprudence.”

  2. Outstanding.
    It’s always interesting to guess if the fools parroting “conspiracy theory” are shills or just idiots.
    This “painter” clown uses the canned media talking point terms and standard shill tactic of not addressing any of the facts and instead relying on “conspiracy theory” claims and failing at discrediting.

  3. So much to dig into here with this article. I will have to give it another couple readings for sure. I am glad that Barrie is still doing what he does best which is hard investigative journalism. Thanks for the effort Barrie and thanks for posting it here.

      1. Yes, the length and wait is almost certainly why the comment count is currently low. I haven’t had time yet to give it even one thorough read, but will do so within a couple days and then chime in. For the moment, I’ll say that it’s great to see Barrie back!!!

  4. Fuck. Another one. Thank you Barrie and Craig. So much good evidence for a false flag operation. Love the backhanded compliment Barrie pays to the more skeptical writers who have doubts but still accept the basic story. That Barrie acknowledges 99% of us don’t give a shit about politics but obviously these writers do yet still eat up the the kibble the security services feed them is so disheartening. It’s the same with 9/11, 7/7, Sandy Hook, etc., with so many glaring anomalies in the official story these “reporters” don’t report. I’d love to show this story to one of them and watch him or her squirm, or better, have a come to Jesus moment and see the bright light of truth. Love this website, Craig. Oh, and kudos to the best commenters on the web!

  5. I am glad to see Barrie back on T&S again!
    I still haven’t gotten through the entire article due to computer problems…web problems, and constant attacks by aliens from Poopoo Planet….

  6. What? The US Corporation involved in a false flag which, coincidentally and inadvertently, helps to herald in a New World Tyranny?
    Please allow me to muster up my most shocked and surprising facial expression ever…
    Thank you. If I was foolish enough to contract with FaceCrook, you could experience it there. Sadly…

  7. Another prima facie case for a false flag…Is anybody still counting?
    I’ll respectfully add that as usual, the most disturbing aspect of the alleged false flag is its ostensible ignorance by a multitude of watchdogs, starting with the very real Canadian political leaders who oppose Harper’s policies. Why didn’t they come up with this analysis? Are they too uninquisitive? Are they too dumb? Now that this analysis is widely available, are they going to promote it and publicly challenge Harper to account for it? Or are they going to ignore it, except for dismissing its author and supporters as nutty conspiracy theorists? Ditto for Canadian anti-war or pro-privacy organizations…
    Hayakawa indeed makes very good points. Did he forget an essential category of words that displace rational thought? Slur words (“conspiracy theorists”).
    Saunders’ analysis of “stings” indeed misses what may be their main purpose. Why? Is he that ignorant to miss the purpose? Is he too dumb to understand the link? Or does he knowingly beat around the bush–pun intended? Ditto for Keefer.
    These opinion-makers ostensibly oppose excessive official reactions to the alleged false flag. Yet they do not put forth the one argument that would not only make this false flag fall flat, but also compel governments and other institutions to provide safeguards against future false flags. Hence the conspiracy theory that they are not as ignorant and as dumb as they seem. An intelligent design may very well stand behind the limitations of their analyses and calls to action. They may actually be as dangerous as, or perhaps even more dangerous than Harper and his accomplices, because their prior commitment to censor the false flag and send their gullible supporters on wild goose chases would have been a prerequisite to the false flag.

  8. Great article Mr. Zwicker, thanks to Craig.
    It seems that false flags continue to be the Machiavellian tool of choice for these psychopaths.
    I’m still constantly surprised and not a little depressed by the fact that so many folks (outside fine blogs such as this one) are still clueless about the history and key strategic relevance to false flags whether carried out by the US military, CIA, FBI, or the British MI6 and most obviously the Israeli MOSSAD. The cumulative evidence is overwhelming. Our present world mess is in large part due to these major and minor atrocities constantly encircling the granddaddy of 9/11.
    The power of cognitive dissonance and normalcy bias still holds sway against all the odds. Until people actually grasp that such evil is standard protocol and has been for centuries, I fear that people will continue to be corralled right up until our civilization falls into its own pathological footprint. After all, if these psychopaths really get their backs up against the wall thanks to Russia making a stand then we can expect them to react on the scale of 9/11 once again.
    You never know, perhaps the changes in the Earth and environment which seem to be mirroring the carnage wrought by these maniacs will scupper such plans? Hopefully without too much cost…Cosmic justice perhaps? There is a remarkable case for such a cyclic regulation…

  9. I have now read this excellent article by Mr Zwicker, and all I can say is splendid job.
    The article covers all the bases. Anyone familiar with the deep political theater we deal with here should have no problems getting it.
    People such as ‘Painter’ who have locked themselves out of their own minds are simply lost and no beacons that beckon them will be seen.
    Thank you Barrie and Craig. Par excellence!!

  10. I found these particular points in the article quite prescient:
    . . .
    “The death of an actual bona fide terrorist or, much more often the case, a recruited patsy (the classic being Oswald) obviates the possibility of a trial in a court of law (as distinguished from trial in the “court of public opinion”). Trial in a court of law carries with it the possibility of evidence emerging that could be damning to the state and the Crown’s case.”~Barrie Zwicker
    6 The branding
    The St-Jean-sur-Richelieu events were instantly defined as “terrorism” by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the House of Commons and thereafter were widely so defined by the military, by “intelligence experts,” RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson and by many media players. (There are honourable exceptions to the general rush to judgment within the media. We identify some later.)
    The “anthrax attacks,” MacQueen writes, “were the result of a [domestic] conspiracy meant to help redefine the enemy of the West, revising the global conflict framework from the Cold War to the Global War on Terror.”
    “The events in Ottawa were not meant to replace the global-conflict framework but rather to reinforce the new 2001 model: “Islam” as the permanent mortal enemy of “the West.”
    The rhetoric, like ad copy, is part and parcel of the branding. Buzzwords (“war on terror,”), code words (“national security”), snarl words (“terrorists,” “radical Islam,” “threats”) and purr words (“our allies,” “security”) as semanticist S. I. Hayakawa dubbed them, displace rational thought.
    The historical record – not in the slightest acknowledged by the “security vs privacy” equation – shows conclusively that those most spied upon, whose personal security is threatened repeatedly, are those who question authority, those who are peaceful dissidents, those who seek and act for improvements to the status quo, specifically for more equality and justice, those who are left-of-centre up to and including revolutionaries. The danger posed to loss of privacy among those on the left is much greater than it is for those on the right or for those not politically involved at all, which is to say the vast majority of citizens. This historical record goes unaddressed in 99% or more of the discourse about the dangers of “loss of privacy.
    The so-called “war on terror,” fed by the national security state to the public like slops to pigs, paves the way through regression to a world of “military tribunals” (an oxymoron), of Star Chambers, to a new Dark Ages.~”Ibid

  11. Thanks for the article, Barrie. I had assumed that these events were a false flag so good to see it confirmed – it bore all the hallmarks and as usual, the events were breathlessly reported around the world including the increasingly lapdog New Zealand.
    NZ is the slowcoach for the Five Eyes, but the recent election victory has seen us take a large lurch to the right with the inevitable security clampdown to come. I think we are due for an event here soon, maybe not on a large scale but enough to hurry through some laws to whip us into line. As soon as John Key was made leader of the National Party, I knew he was the banker’s man who was going to make NZ more like Australia – he disguises his right-wing puppet persona by being an amiable idiot.

  12. Canada’s Quiet Coup: How a CIA Off-shoot Helped Install Stephen Harper as Canada’s Prime Minister
    Author, poet, academic, and former Canadian diplomat Prof. Peter Dale Scott recently disclosed a wikileaks cable indicating that the International Republican Institute (IRI), an off-shoot of the CIA, and a subsidiary of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) helped install Stephen Harper as Canada’s Prime Minister. This was the coup.
    “The assault by the Harper-Flanagan juggernaut on the generally friendly orientation of Canadian conservatism towards the state, towards Indigenous peoples, and towards the institutions of Crown sovereignty helped clear aside obstacles to the importation from United States of the Republican Party’s jihad on managed capitalism. Flanagan and Harper took charge of the Canadian version of the Reagan Revolution aimed at transforming the social welfare state into the stock market state.”
    The implications of this conservative “jihad” are a threat to our national security on many levels. Stephen Harper’s attacks on Canada’s knowledge base are foundational to what can only be described as an endorsement of man-made climate change, which is likely the foremost threat to both humanity and to Canada. The Fifth Assessment Report of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stresses the urgency to act now to mitigate catastrophic climate change, and yet the Harper government is moving Canada in the opposite direction. Most recently, the Harper government ratified a bilateral agreement with China, the Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPPA), which all but guarantees further expansion of Canada’s Tar Sands, and an expansion of its carbon economy.

  13. Always worthwhile to read Dan Noel’s comments, in this case particularly where he refers to quotations, included in my post, from Globe and Mail reporter Doug Saunders and academic Michael Keefer. Dan writes:
    Dan writes: “An intelligent design may very well stand behind the limitations of their analyses and calls to action. They may actually be as dangerous as, or perhaps even more dangerous than Harper and his accomplices, because their prior commitment to censor the false flag and send their gullible supporters on wild goose chases.”
    Dan is dealing with the phenomenon of “left gatekeepers” among whose ranks are Noam Chomsky (IMHO the worst), Amy Goodman et al. And “dangerous” is one of the words by which left gatekeepers in their work of “controlled opposition,” should be described.
    My personal opinion, however, is that neither Saunders nor Keefer, for different reasons, should be lumped in with the likes of Chomsky and Goodman.
    In the case of Saunders, working within the constraints of he MSM, he did at least introduce the concept of the sting and relate it to FBI false flags. True he did not spell out the perfidy of these FBI ops. Nor did he take it further. In other words it could be said that he missed the point of what he himself was reporting. Deliberately or not, I would not at this time speculate.
    What he did write, nevertheless, is in the vicinity of revealing illicit practices of the national security state and in any event was more telling than anything else I encountered in the immediate reportage of “Canada’s October Surprise.” And I doubt if anything better will appear in Canada’s MSM. So with Saunders I think it’s a matter of giving credit where credit is due, for “fugitive paragraphs.” There are all too few of those.
    The case of Keefer is more clear-cut. He is a straight-out Truther — of 9/11 and of the so-called “Toronto 18.” He’s discussed false flags in public speeches and his work on Israeli tyranny against the Palestinians is superb.
    That he would, unfortunately, appear to be a left gatekeeper, in the context of my post, is due to my failing in turn to spell out the context of Keefer’s work.
    Dan’s general point stands, however.

  14. “When the Maine sank, the proactive Assistant Secretary of the Navy had been Teddy Roosevelt. After the 1898 Spanish-American War he became governor of New York, and by 1901 was President of the United States. When the Lusitania sank, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy was his distant cousin Franklin D. Roosevelt – who likewise went on to become governor of New York and then President.
    Just as coincident: during the Lusitania affair, the head of the British Admiralty was yet another cousin of Franklin D. – Winston Churchill. And in a chilling déjà vu, as Pearl Harbor approached, these two men were now heads of their respective states.”~James Perloff
    . . . . . . .
    Obviously not: “Just as coincident” but a clear indicator of machinations behind the scenes by a ‘hidden hand’. So much of deep history has such ‘coincident’ that it is obvious agenda covered by pale Limited Hangout.

  15. So in just a few short days it will be FIFTY ONE YEARS since the coup d’etat in Dallas.
    The ramifications of that day effect and infect us to this day. If the people of this country would have been smart enough to stand up against the obvious bullshit cover story of Oswald as a “lone nut shooter”, we may have avoided ending up in this fascist maximum security state.
    Who ever knows “what might have been”?

    1. I have been thinking of Fetzer ever since T&S had that anniversary special with Fetzer’s Zapruder film alteration hypothesis. Especially as this theory puts the timeline of the shots in question. A lot of analysis relies relies on the timeline found on the Zapruder film.
      I am concerned because of Fetzer’s MO in the 9/11 case; many of the comments above express what I have found to be true of Fetzer: a tireless self promoter, arrogant and nasty with those who disagree with him, a lack of understanding some very basic science, and on and on. He is certainly an opportunist and a quack salesman for many screwy ideas on 9/11 – why should he be trusted in the JFK arena?
      It got to the point on the T&S thread that I came to accept some of the hypothesis offered, not Fetzer’s, but some of the analysts he was promoting. Looking back now, maybe I made a mistake there.
      More on the issue here:

      1. I already know what you think of Jim Fetzer but I can’t see what has changed since last year that tells you the Zapruder film is authentic. You seem to be suggesting that it’s because it would be very difficult (impossible?) to do. Is that you position, that the U.S. government did not have the means to alter this film to give a false impression of what happened?

        1. I don’t want to make this argument against the faking of the Z-Film here.
          There are some very simple reasons that the story put together last year by Fetzer cannot be true, the main being that the film was not available to that “CIA lab” that it is asserted did the faking. I have made those original arguments available at the URL to my blog. Repeating them here is not a productive path.

        1. There was more to the film ‘Parkland’ to cause suspicion than the idea that the Z-Film is genuine. I would fault that film for other aspects it promotes.
          If you wish to read the counter arguments against Fetzer’s take and point out what you think is wrong with those arguments I would be happy to read that and perhaps engage you on such points.

          1. Well, I read your remarks about the faking being technically too difficult to do. But I’m wondering if it is Fetzer you are finding fault with or the idea that the film was tampered with, which has been put forward by a number of people, including John Costella, David Lifton, Jack White, and others. I would like to return to this topic once I get my current blog post done (this week, I hope). I’m afraid I might be using this opportunity to procrastinate.

          2. “the faking being technically too difficult.”
            But those remarks were from last year on the thread we are discussing. No that is not my present position. My present position comes from reading more materials on this issue. It is not a new one to the hard core JFK researchers.
            Yes Jack White is in that fakery camp, but I would be wary of including others simply because Fetzer makes the claims that they are. I have read things by Lifton that dispute that angle in subtle language because of the way Fetzer bullies those who disagree with him.
            Let’s just take on issue that is one of the crux points of the story Jim tells…
            From J. Thompson:
            “A study that appears in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE [states that] the film appears to have been in the hands of the National Photographic Interpretation Center run by the CIA already Friday night, where an original and three copies were struck and then returned to Dallas in time for a small group of reporters, including Dan Rather, to view the film in a preliminarily-edited version.”
            The study referred to is by Mike Pincher and Roy L. Schaeffer. These writers manufacture out of whole cloth a flight of “at least the original and one copy” from Dallas to Andrews Air Force Base on the night of the 22nd and a return flight of the altered film to Dallas in the early morning hours of November 23rd. They do this without a single fact to support their fancy. They even cite the Max Phillips note (quoted above), but never tell the reader that Phillips also pointed out that “Mr. Zapruder is in custody of the ‘master’ [read ‘original’] film.”
            They – and apparently Professor Fetzer – have simply misinterpreted the socalled “CIA 450 Documents” discovered by Paul Hoch in the early 1980s.
            These documents recount the preparation of four photo briefing boards for government officials based upon NPIC’s analysis of the film. The question at issue is the timing of the shots. The selection of frames for the briefing boards makes clear that NPIC is looking at the same film we see today.
            Telltale information is found on page six of the documents which refer to the December 6, 1963 issue of LIFE. Hence, the examination was carried out not on November 22nd – but sometime in December 1963. The copy of the film analyzed was the Secret Service copy, whose agents stayed with the film while the briefing boards were prepared. AARB located and interviewed two former employees of NPIC who stated that internegatives were made of only single frames to be mounted on briefing boards and that they never “reproduced the film as a motion picture.” ~Josiah Thompson, 11/98

          3. while I am not in a position to get into this in detail now (I thought you said you didn’t that think that would be productive?), I do want to point out that when I mention the names of others who believe the film was faked, I am not taking Fetzer’s word for it, I am listening to their own presentations at the 1996 conference that I referred to in my JFK/Fetzer piece last year. Lifton, for example, is very clear about he belief that the film was altered. Could you be mixing this subject unduly with your contempt for Fetzer?

          4. “Could you be mixing this subject unduly with your contempt for Fetzer?”
            Perhaps, I will be more careful and sure of what I say. I will let it lay until you post your new article. If you wish to come back to this issue here, let me know.

  16. Craig and HR1,
    I too will be interested in the Zapruder film discussion as well as a general discussion of Fetzer because I have multiple serious issues with multiple pieces of Fetzer’s work. I don’t want to get into it here either as I would like to focus on Barrie’s excellent article here and also welcome Barrie back to Truth and Shadows.
    On that note I have a very serious question for Barrie having to do with the possible motives for this Canadian false flag operation.
    Barrie do you think or have you seen any evidence that this event is being used to push a gun control agenda in Canada? I think it is clear that it is being used to cement a more totalitarian police state in general but do you see evidence that it is being used specifically to drive a gun control agenda?

    1. Hi Adam,
      Thanks for the comment. I have posted some commentary and information on last years thread of Fetzer being interviewed by Craig already – sort of a preview of my latest findings:
      ‘The faking of the Zapruder film and the ‘magic bullet’: an interview with Jim Fetzer’
      Also you can check out where I am at and going with this at my own blog on this page:
      To get to the current stuff just scroll down to the first entries from 2014 – about 2/3rds down.

  17. AdamR that is a most interesting question. First let me directly answer your query: I have not seen evidence that “Canada’s October Surprise” had as one of its motives to drive a stricter gun control agenda.
    I can’t say that I’ve seen all the mainstream and alternative coverage but I’m sure that I’ve followed this more closely than 19 out of 20 people, and the issue simply hasn’t arisen that I’ve seen apart from the (still hanging) question of how and where Zehaf-Bibeau obtained his rifle. But this question of the provenance of the rifle so far has been given no more weight in the MSM, or anywhere that I have seen, than the question of where he got his car, since he was living in a homeless shelter. As a matter of fact there are reliable accounts of his purchase of the car, but where the gun came from is, to my knowledge, still shrouded in mystery.
    As you probably know, the gun control situation in Canada is very different from that south of the border, in almost every regard. Gun laws in Canada have traditionally been and remain much more strict than in the USA. The gun lobby is pretty muscular in Canada and growing moreso, but doesn’t hold a candle to the NRA. Canadians are in general in favour of gun controls, probably stricter ones. This means that culturally Canadians and Americans are quite far apart on the issue, and this includes those of us on both sides of the border who are Truthers, or who consider ourselves leftwing or progressive or, ye gods, socialistic. It’s a similar Canada-USA split as with public health care, maybe not as stark, as I think millions of Americans do favour a prepaid public health system.
    Now to return to this particular false flag and the issue of gun control. Clearly Prime Minister Stephen Harper is far-right ideologically, oriented toward big business, especially fossil fuel corporations. He admires the U.S. far right, adopts many of its stands and tricks. Not only does he not favour more gun controls, it is the polar opposite. The evidence is stark that he is opposed to even the gun controls on the books in Canada. One of his constituencies is rural folk, whereas a majority of Canadians – now about 75% I think – live in cities. Rural and urban Canadians are split on gun controls. It’s understandable. Harper successfully (except for one instance) ordered the destruction of all the records of Canada’s long gun registry. These records were painstakingly gathered over years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars to enter into databases, protect and maintain. In this he was opposed by almost all the police community and the majority of Canadians. One province, Quebec, has stood up to him on this and protected those data. The matter may go to the Supreme Court; it involves the Canadian Constitution.
    So if Harper was the one who green-lighted this false flag op, and I believe he was, more gun control would be the last conceivable motive he would have. It was Harper’s bad luck that a rifle killed the soldier at the National War Memorial. Harper would have much preferred a beheading. But the PM has escaped, to my knowledge, all censure about this rogue rifle. Conceivably it was registered but if so, that fact ironically the PM destroyed, thus depriving (honest) police of a tool for helping unravel the crime.
    The Wikipedia entry about the Canadian Firearms Registry (
    contains a lot of dry info that is mostly accurate but I for one can see that pro-gun activists have molded the entry considerably.

    1. Barrie,
      Thank you for the insight into this issue. I must admit that I know very little about the Canadian political system and even less about the attitudes of average Canadians about guns and gun control. I believe you are spot on with your analysis above of the gun control issue as it relates to this false flag incident in Canada. I am looking at this through American colored glasses I guess since here the undercurrent of our false flag operations is definitely a push for gun control. “Gun control” is a very interesting and quite deceptive term by the way deserving of a conversation of its own but that is for another time.
      I think that perhaps the globalists feel comfortable with the present level of gun control (meaning they control all the guns) in Canada. I believe they have successfully disarmed Australia in the past decade and England has been disarmed completely for a long time now. So from my perspective the globalists have one country left that they need to disarm before they can openly take over the whole planet under a tyrannical one world government, and that country is the United States.
      For a long long time Barrie I was very much opposed to owning guns. I am a firm believer in changing the world the way Gandhi went about it. Still to this day I think his way is by far the best way to change things and reverse injustice. That having been said however I have come to understand the true nature of the threat to our lives and freedom. That threat is ruthless, cold, calculating, and has no remorse whatsoever about killing people, lots of people. That threat I have come to understand is very real and is working globally on a plan that will in the end enslave us all. Gandhi believed his methods would have worked even on someone like Hitler and I believe he is right. His methods would work universally IF WE USED THEM IN MASS. That is the problem you see is getting large masses of people to use his methods. I do not know how to motivate large groups of people to do things Gandhi’s way and that is my eternal dilemma and it is why my attitudes about guns have changed over the past decade.
      I was for a long time what you might call a flaming liberal, left winger, democrat. I used to hate neo conservative, right wing, republicans and still do dislike them intensely. However over the past decade or so I have come to realize that the neo-cons I hate and the liberals I used to love are actually one and the same and both serve the same master. In short Barrie I discovered that I have been had, duped, snookered by a very clever and very malevolent group of people. I call these people for lack of a better term “Globalists” but some people refer to the same group as the New World Order or the Illuminati. Whatever you choose to call them they are very real and their plan is world domination. It doesn’t really matter for this discussion if you believe the “globalists” exist or not because the bottom line is that for whatever reason America and I believe Canada too is going down a very dark path towards a police state.
      Now my dilemma comes full circle to where I am at today. Today I am a libertarian, gun owner, who still believes 100% in Gandhi’s peaceful methods to create change. I am also a realist though in the sense that I realize how ill prepared the masses are to actually carry out Gandhi’s methods. Perhaps I am too pessimistic but I don’t think the masses are ready or able to change things peacefully. The globalists are smashing ahead with their plans which lead inexorably to our enslavement and impoverishment. They have the masses divided into so many groups at odds with each other it is truly pathetic. Divide and conquer is working so well for them I see no indication that we will achieve any sort of unity as would be required to succeed with Gandhi’s peaceful revolution. The globalists intend to rule over us as Emperors do by controlling EVERYTHING and by taking EVERYTHING. So my dilemma is how do I stop them from doing this, how do I prevent my loved ones from being ground up in this evil machine? I ask myself if I can somehow motivate masses of people to stop them peacefully Gandhi’s way? I answer myself honestly and say no I cannot even motivate my own friends and family so how on earth can I influence the masses?
      The globalists are pushing full blast here in the US to take away our right to bear arms and they are killing and destroying people in the effort. I truly believe that if they succeed in the United States to take away our ability to defend ourselves that the globalists will quickly take over not only America but the world. I cannot count on any support from others Barrie with the exception of a very few so it is up to me to defend my loved ones myself. So when they kick in my door I will meet them with the only force I have and try my best to stop them. I am not going to a Fema camp and I am not going to obey an unjust system. The globalist system has already done a lot of damage to me personally and to my loved ones (I will tell you about it another time) and it is just getting worse and worse.
      So today Barrie I am a libertarian, a gun owner, and a realist who knows that although I do not want to fight or be violent I will be forced into it sooner or later. America is headed into another revolution Barrie and it is not going to be pretty. The American people are so factionalized and dysfunctional that it is going to take a long time before the real patriots rise to the top and win. In the mean time it is going to be mobs and government goons running rampant and killing indiscriminately. I will at least be able and equipped to put up a fight when they come for me.
      I respectfully suggest that you Barrie and all Canadians really think long and hard about what you are going to do when the globalists come to your door. If you have no way to defend yourselves from an out of control brutal government what will you do when they come for you?

  18. You make a number of persuasive points, Adam, and in a welcome, rational and civil way. You also share your own personal development vis a vis this issue, which to me is important. It’s a life and death issue and as such has a high personal and emotional content. So this kind of sharing in itself is valuable, I would think, to all those on every side. (With gun control, maybe the idea of “every side” is inappropriate. It seems that a more appropriate parallel would be to say those “looking down the barrel” of the gun control issue, or those “looking through the crosshairs” of it! I’m only half joking. Is it one of those seemingly almost intractable issues, similar to the “Israeli-Palestinian” conflict? (Probably that is a misnomer as well, because it might well be called “the Israeli tyranny issue.” When Germany occupied, among other European countries, the Netherlands, I don’t think the Dutch called it “the German-Holland conflict.” They called it “the German (or Nazi) occupation.”)
    But I should be “sticking to my guns” here. Methinks “gun controls” is a topic worthy of the best discussion we can have on it. Let’s lay down our non-violent word weapons for the moment and toss the grenade over to Craig, to see how T&S might make a useful contribution – or whether it should. With all due respect to you and me, Adam, as well as others who find this an important topic that deserves more study and more exchanges, I doesn’t seem to particularly belong here in the comments section of a post about a major false flag op.
    Perhaps gun controls really is outside the mandate of T&S altogether. Blogs must stick to their foci. If that is the case, there must be other fora. (I’m using foci and fo a just to make gentle fun of myself!)
    I’ll bow out here, saving my word ammo for later and wherever…

      1. Sorry it took me so long to respond to your comment.
        I definitely come out of the same tradition as Barrie, and based on Stephen Harper’s position on guns, the issue is not a simple one. In Canada we have a very different mindset on the subject, and yet we have a ton of guns up here. I don’t think the Ottawa and Quebec events in October were specifically about gun control. If they had been we’d have heard about some government initiative to tighten gun control laws. But it was mainly the terrorist angle, with the goal being to get support behind Canadian military intervention in Iraq and Syria and to offer the government a further excuse to steal our civil liberties.
        In my pre-9/11 truth days I was in favor of gun control, but I was not really awakened to the global conspiracy and the bogus war on terror that now seem so obvious. I will say that I have more sympathy for the “right to bear arms” position than I used to. I don’t believe the government should be taking away anyone’s guns, but I do believe there are some reasonable safeguards that should be in place before guns are sold, but I’m willing to hear contrary arguments.
        I believe that we all have a right to defend ourselves against attackers and against a tyrannical government, but I don’t believe that guns are an end in themselves. I don’t share the worship of the gun that seems to be prevalent in the U.S. I was horrified when Steven Seagall said he wanted to organize a plan to put armed guards in schools to “protect the children” after Sandy Hook. This is exactly what we do not need. The globalists succeed by creating fear, and this initiative feds right into that. They want us to think that the enemy is each other.
        Finally, I would caution against explaining these false flags solely in terms of gun control. That’s too easy. In fact, the issue might actually distract us from deeper reasons. False flags are carried out for a complex combination of purposes, including to create fear, discouragement, and hopelessness so that we will meekly hand over our rights and our human dignity for some false “security.”
        My question is whether those who want to defend themselves against a tyrannical government will recognize it when they see it whether they have guns or not. How much anger did we see when martial law was imposed in Boston? People were more concerned about buying Boston Strong t-shirts.

        1. Thanks for weighing in on this Craig. There is a lot of truth in what you say and I want to clarify, if I left the false impression, that I do NOT think Sandy Hook was ALL about gun control. I think that gun control was a major part of the agenda behind it however it is only part of the overall agenda which in my view is totalitarian control over us all. The fear and hopelessness you speak of are definitely part of the plan to usher in that totalitarian control. The gun control part of the plan in my view is a necessary prerequisite in order for the globalists to establish total control. So long as we the people are armed we can through our sheer numbers alone put up one hell of a fight and the globalists would almost definitely lose. Only by taking away our right to bear arms in mass can they hope to win the control over us all they seek.
          Now we could beat the globalists using Gandhi’s methods IF AND ONLY IF the people in mass were ready and willing to do so. My dilemma is that the people in mass do not seem to be at all ready or able to do things that way. Most people in my view do not even understand that there is a peaceful way to win let alone put it into practice. It comes down to the people mostly being spiritually bankrupt. That is only my opinion of the situation of course and I would be extremely happy to be proved wrong. But if I am right and the masses are not able or willing to implement a peaceful revolution then the situation is going to continue to devolve to the point where it crushes people. This devolving process will entail cops getting more violent and Stasi like than they already are on the one hand and the masses getting more mob like and violent on the other. The mobs and the police state will eventually violently clash and both will lash out haphazardly at everyone else who they perceive to not be on their side. People like me and my loved ones will be targets of the police state for sure and probably targets of mindless mobs as well if not on purpose then by accident. Bottom line for me is that I cannot protect my loved ones from this devolving anarchy without an effective weapon such as a gun. Even having one only increases my chances a little bit since the globalists have sophisticated weapon systems designed for mass genocide. I want to have that chance though. I am not willing to put my life and the lives of my loved ones at steak on the hope that the masses will see the light and change things peacefully. As I said in my opinion the masses can be counted on only to be irrational and to devolve as the situation gets worse.
          You make my point for me when you point out that the people in Boston did not even recognize tyranny when it came to their door. Only a few individuals spoke out about the martial law imposed on Boston.
          As far as the arguments in favor of “gun control” go they only make sense if you believe the government is essentially good and is there to protect you and help you. I know for a fact that they are not good and they exist to perpetuate themselves and take as much as they can from the rest of us. I also know the only way to take control completely is if we are disarmed and factionalized. They have us factionalized already so all that is left for them to do is to disarm those few of us who will resist in a united and intelligent way. They have gone a very long way already toward disarming us and in my view we are teetering on the brink of defacto “gun control” now. They are attacking our ammo supply by buying up massive quantities of ammo and by shutting down the very last lead smelting plant in the USA and by banning lead altogether (here in CA where I live they have done that). They are step by step limiting the kinds of guns we can “legally” have by banning certain features, magazine capacities, types of ammo etc. For example we cannot get armor piercing rounds which would be the only effective rounds for armored vehicles such as MRAP’s. See once you realize the 2nd amendment is there so we can protect ourselves from the government it becomes crystal clear why we need automatic weapons with large magazines and things like armor piercing bullets. It also becomes crystal clear why the government is progressively banning all those things. They are banning them so that they have a tremendous tactical advantage over us when the shooting starts. They are hoping that advantage will offset our vastly superior numbers. Maybe they are right, I don’t know but if I were them I wouldn’t bet on winning because we are smart and we are many. Their doubts about winning is probably the only reason they have not just openly started rounding us all up already.
          Incidentally this documentary just came out about Sandy Hook which I have watched and can recommend highly. (That is not to say I agree with every single point made in the film.)

          1. One final quick point I want to make about gun control arguments. Lets say you want to ban guns only from insane people or from violent felons. Ok sounds reasonable right? Well what stops them from burning down a building full of people or driving a truck through a crowd or poisoning a water supply? See what I am saying? Guns are not even the most effective method for mass killings anyway so by the logic of “gun control” arguments we have to ban insane people from a whole host of potential things that could kill such as matches, lighters, gasoline, vehicles, chemicals, drugs, aircraft, and on and on and on. What is to stop them from derailing trains by damaging the tracks? What is to stop them from cutting the power during a severe cold snap? See the problem? The issue is not guns, the issue is what is making all these people insane and violent?

          2. What stops an insane person or a felon who has been banned from having a gun from purchasing one from a person who has not been banned from having one? See the only way to really ban guns is if you take them away from everyone.

        2. I would like to weigh in on the gun control issue as well.
          As most would know I am not in favor of gun control in any sense of the word.
          I want to make it clear that I do not rely on the 2nd Amendment guarantee on this issue.
          My opinion is based on the fundamental rights of liberty that predate governmental policies on self defense, as an individual right regardless of any so-called “authority’s” opinion.
          As an ‘anarchist’, I do not have any use for government interference in the rights and liberties of human beings. The concept of government is that it has the monopoly on the use of force and violence; this is the bottom line of what distinguishes “government’ from any other form of authority.
          I can explain my views more thoroughly should any care to inquire as to what these are.

          1. I will inquire. You always bring a very insightful perspective to a discussion so please do tell me more about your views on “gun control”.
            As an aside I think I should point out that the term “gun control” is a very deceptive and dishonest term used to manipulate and mislead people. Much like saying the twin towers “collapsed” instead of saying they were demolished the term “gun control” sounds reasonable but in reality it is not.

          2. Thank you Adam.
            Yes, language is always at the heart of the matter in a society driven by ‘thought control’.
            So that is the crux of the matter right there, the issue is not “gun control, the issue is thought control, the way we think of ourselves and our rights as human beings.
            As I said and will try to explain here. ‘Guns’ are not even the issue; the issue is whether human beings have the right to self defense. So to attend directly to your aside, the issue should be addressed from that perspective, and the first aspect to deal with is that of language.
            It should also be highlighted that what is called “government” is simply a body that has taken upon itself to be in the sole possession of physical force. They claim a monopoly on the use of violence to achieve their ends.
            Many lucid thinkers are well aware of and speak to the frame in which it is recognized that a “corporation” is a fictitious entity. But few seem to grasp, or at least they have not yet articulated that what is called ‘government’ is no less a fictitious entity than a corporation.
            We are opposed to what is termed ‘corporatism’ or fascism. What is it the gives the corporate state it’s position as a danger to our well being? Is it not the fact that it is in that position of holding the monopoly of deadly force? Corporations would have no power but persuasion over a society if it were not the merger with the power of the state to enforce the will of corporations with lethal force.
            Humanity will only be mature at the point where it recognizes that ‘government’ is nothing but a surrogate for ‘parents’.

          3. Protocol 13, subsection 6

  19. The “Strategy of Tension” in the Cold War Period*
    Daniele Ganser
    Historians today and in the coming years face a challenging task: they must
    write the history of the events of September 11, 2001. What they write will be
    taught in history classes. But what will they write? Will they write that Osama Bin
    Laden sent 19 Muslims to launch a surprise attack on the U.S.? Or will they write
    that the administration of President George W. Bush was responsible for the attack,
    either constructing it or deliberately permitting it in order to shock the U.S.
    population and to create a pretext for increasing military spending and attacking
    Afghanistan and Iraq?
    Having examined much of the data related to the 9/11 events, I am
    convinced a new and thorough investigation is needed. But when I have questioned
    the official narrative of 9/11 in my native Switzerland I have encountered vigorous
    objections from people. Why would any government in the world, they have asked,
    attack its own population or, only slightly less criminal, deliberately allow a foreign
    group to carry out such an attack? While brutal dictatorships, such as the regime of
    Pol Pot in Cambodia, are known to have had little respect for the life and dignity of
    their citizens, surely a Western democracy, the thinking goes, would not engage in
    such an abuse of power. And if criminal elements within a Western democracy, in
    North America or in Europe, had engaged in such a crime, would not elected
    officials or the media find out and report on it? Is it imaginable that criminal
    persons within a government could commit terrorist operations against innocent
    citizens, who support the very same government with the taxes they pay every year?
    Would nobody notice? These are difficult questions, even for academics who
    specialize in the history of secret warfare. But in fact, there are historical examples
    of such operations being implemented by Western democracies.
    In this essay, I will not deal directly with 9/11 but will look at what we can
    learn from history. I will report on some of the newest academic data about secret
    warfare during the Cold War. A secret military strategy that targets domestic
    populations with terrorism does indeed exist. It is called the “strategy of tension.”
    And it was implemented by Western democracies.
    In its essence, the strategy of tension targets the emotions of human beings
    and aims to spread maximum fear among the target group. “Tension” refers to
    emotional distress and psychological fear, whereas “strategy” refers to the technique
    of bringing about such distress and fear. A terrorist attack in a public place, such as
    a railway station, a market place, or a school bus, is the typical technique through
    which the strategy of tension is implemented. After the attack—and this is a crucial
    element—the secret agents who carried out the crime blame it on a political
    opponent by removing and planting evidence.

  20. Brilliant. Thank you for writing and sharing this, and please consider the important evidence I have to add to it…
    “‘The evidence suggests a grand plan, not an opportunistic foray,” writes MacQueen.”…
    Connect the dots that expose the grand plan, and the who and the why, and much more…
    “At CGI, we’re in the business of satisfying clients. For more than 30 years, we’ve partnered with U.S. defense, civilian, and intelligence agencies”…
    “For 38 years, CGI have partnered with U.S. defense, civilian, and intelligence agencies to support their mission-essential needs.”…
    In 2004 the Canadian I.T. company, CGI, merged with American Management Systems, also known as AMS, a high technology and management consulting firm founded by five former U.S. Defense Department “Whiz Kids” that specialized in U.S. defense contracts. Then this company became CGI-AMS, and then CGI…fraudulently continuing to present themselves to the public as the Canadian company they had been before the merger, when the evidence proves CGI are now a mega global corporation with significant ties to the U.S. Government & military, to help them carryout their plan to take over the Canadian Government, and ultimately become Canadians — and EVERYONE’S — real life “BIG BROTHER”…
    “CGI greatly values its continuing partnership with the Department of Homeland Security in support of its mission to protect the homeland, prevent terrorism…”…
    “CGI is launching a Canadian defence, public safety and intelligence unit based on similar efforts in the United States.”…
    The evidence supports that Stephen Harper & his government are part of the plan, that CGI helped Stephen Harper & his party gain power, so that they could then help facilitate CGI’s take over of the Canadian Government by awarding CGI contracts worth more than a BILLION — outsourcing an extreme amount of the work done by the Canadian government to CGI, giving CGI access to & control over ALL of Canadians personal & private information held by the Canadian Government, & available to our Department of National Defence & the RCMP, etc., & placing thousands of CGI employees (who CGI calls “members”) into almost EVERY department of our government, including the Department of National Defence & the RCMP, etc…
    Just the tip of the iceberg of the contracts Harper & his government have awarded CGI…
    CGI’s $25 million dollar contract with our Department of National Defence, just one of many — the government department that employs Martin Magnan, the man seen improperly holding up Cpl. Cirillo’s feet during the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, when proper procedure is to keep a person’s feet flat on the ground when administering CPR & after suffering a gun shot wound, playing his role in helping to block the public from seeing what was really going on…
    “Martin Magnan – Communications Advisor for the Government of Canada. Acting as a liaison officer between the Department of National Defence Public Affairs organization and the Minister of National Defence Office.”…
    “Defense agencies must provide secure, timely information to large groups of people often in hostile environments to protect national security at home and abroad…Our long-standing client relationships in the United States, Canada and Europe—and the many former senior military and intelligence personnel working at CGI.”…
    Martin Magnan’s wife is also a significant member of the military, as the video above proves, while CGI have a substantial relationship with the military…
    CGI’s contract with the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces worth $4.5 million dollars, just one of many…—US-Army-Forces-Command
    As the evidence in the video posted above proves, both Martin Magnan & his wife are members of The Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute…This evidence referring to CGI is on the CDFAI website…
    “In 2010 he became the Canadian Forces Chief of Transformation, leading a multi-disciplinary team of military and civilian personnel culminating in the “2011 Report on Transformation” at …In 2011 he retired from the Canadian Forces and became a Senior Vice President with CGI, a large Canadian multinational.”…
    CGI’s $15 million dollar contract with the RCMP, just one of many — while the RCMP were significantly involved with the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, etc…
    CGI’s $36 million dollar contract with Justice Canada, just one of many — the government department that employs Barbara Winters, the woman seen improperly blowing non-stop into Cpl. Cirillo’s mouth during the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, playing her role in blocking the public from seeing what was really going on…
    Governor General David Johnston’s daughter Debbie is also a lawyer employed by Justice Canada, which is significant because David Johnston was a key member of CGI’s Board of Directors at the time Harper appointed him — & I believe based on the evidence is a very significant part in this plan — & he’s also a major CGI stockholder…
    “Winters, who works on legal affairs for the Canada Revenue Agency…”…
    …While CGI run the Canada Revenue Agency, & have for years now, so Barbara Winters works very closely with CGI. Just one of the many contracts CGI have with CRA…
    “Feds wasting millions on middlemen agencies…CGI, a large Canadian IT firm, has an ongoing contract to take care of the revenue agency’s IT needs”…
    Barbara Winters also served in the Naval Reserve…
    CGI’s contract with the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces worth $4.5 million dollars, just one of many…
    “Powell also claimed TPG submitted the lowest bid, winning the contract “fair and square.” He said the tender was altered to favour CGI”…
    …to be continued…

  21. Oops, this is the video I meant to post as the third video in my first comment…
    “Barbara Ann Winters”, one of the 5 fake Ottawa shooting false flag hoax heroes…
    …This video provides evidence proving Barbara Winters served in Naval Reserve for 17 years, works for the Department of Justice Canada, & works on legal affairs for the Canada Revenue Agency, while the evidence I provided in the first comment I posted proves CGI have very significant relationships with the Navy, AND the Department of Justice Canada, AND CRA.
    In addition to the substantial evidence I’ve already provided in my first comment proving Barbara Winters significant connection to CGI…CGI also handle claims & litigation on behalf of most insurance companies in Canada — something the majority of Canadians are not aware of — and therefore CGI are in constant close contact with lawyers across Canada, while the video above proves Barbara Winters is a lawyer that represented clients in civil cases that would have put her into direct contact with CGI & their lawyers. Also, CGI have contracts with the courts across Canada to manage their court records & court programs, etc., a very serious conflict of interest since CGI go before the courts as defendants & plaintiffs regularly to represent their insurance company clients…
    “CGI – Integrated Justice Solutions – Case Management”…
    “CGI – Public safety and justice – Enabling better information and efficiency for a safer society”…
    CGI’s current $36 million dollar contract with Justice Canada, just one of many — the government department that employs Barbara Winters…
    In 2002 CGI reported…“CGI counts among its clients 20 of the top 25 insurance carriers in the United States and 17 of the top 25 carriers in Canada”…It’s likely even more now…
    A document I printed off of CGI’s website in 2005 reports…
    “CGI provides a full menu of claims administration outsourcing services for property and casualty insurers, including…
    First Notice of Loss – CGI’s call centers are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week to receive claim notices by phone or fax. We respond to each notice within 24 hours.
    Claims Adjusting – Our adjusters focus on controlling your loss ratio, and increasing your profits.
    SPECIAL INVESTIGATION UNIT – Our Special Investigation Unit conducts full investigations…generating major cost savings for insurers.
    Litigation Management – CGI offers comprehensive Litigation Management services…We offer all aspects of litigation management with precision and attention to detail…Our litigation specialists keep insurers fully informed of case progress and work closely with outside counsel to ensure the best litigation results.”
    …you can find a copy of this document, posted on the Evidence page, if you click on this link…
    I first learned about CGI when I discovered that CGI were “managing” the defence against my major medical malpractice lawsuit on behalf of the defendants insurance company, ING Canada, and — as the substantial undeniable evidence proves — CGI unlawfully used their extensive government contracts to commit serious crimes to obstruct me and my two children from justice, including using their contracts with Alberta Health & Wellness & Human Resources Development Canada, etc., to falsify my health records & CPP records, etc., to create a fraudulent defence against my valid claim, & MUCH, MUCH MORE…
    Ask yourself why almost ALL of the insurance companies in North America pay CGI MILLIONS, if not BILLIONS, each year to “handle” their claims & litigation…& whether or not CGI having access to & control over the very evidence that decide the majority of these claims & lawsuits, including health records & court records, etc., has anything to do with it, especially since the undeniable evidence in my case proves that CGI unlawfully used their extensive government contracts to obstruct me and my two children from justice.
    And further consider that the evidence supports that CGI can secretly use their defence department contracts to access your email, Internet & phone records, etc…EVERYTHING, as part of their “special investigations” for their insurance company clients…
    “Big data presents big opportunities, and the right way to capitalize on it is different for each organization. Data volumes for most organizations are growing rapidly, along with the variety of non-traditional data sources, such as social media…CGI’s Next Generation Information Warehouse offering is designed to bring that perspective, along with innovative solutions for improving your data management and leveraging big data to drive profitable growth”…
    The substantial evidence that I’ve posted on the website I’ve provided a link to above supports that CGI have engaged in unlawful activities involving their extensive government contracts previously, to serve their private and financial interests and those of their 1% clients, adding to the evidence that supports CGI are the ones behind the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, especially since the evidence proves CGI are very likely to get MILLIONS, if not BILLIONS, more in national defence contracts, including with the DND, the RCMP, the military, etc…as a direct result of the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, & the bills that Harper & his government say they are pushing through as a direct result of it. And further the bills resulting from the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax give CGI even more access to Canadians personal & private information, & even more power & control over Canadians, just as 9/11 resulted in CGI getting BILLIONS in contracts from Homeland Security & the U.S. Military, etc., & gave CGI substantially more access to & power over Americans personal & private information & Americans, etc…
    The more “terrorist” threats in Canada & the U.S., etc., & the more military actions that result from them…the more contracts the Canadian Government & U.S. Government — who are in partnership with CGI — can justify awarding to CGI, & the more money CGI & it’s shareholders make…
    Tip of the iceberg…
    “The new bill, which could also include provisions for expanded police powers, was promised by the federal government in the weeks following the October attacks in Quebec and Ottawa that left two members of the Canadian Forces dead…The RCMP has already begun developing an anti-radicalization program in conjunction with local police forces”…
    CGI’s $15 million dollar contract with the RCMP, just one of many — while the RCMP were significantly involved with the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, etc…And while CGI have contracts with provincial police forces across Canada, as well…
    “CGI is a leading provider of IT to nearly 100 federal civilian, provincial and municipal agencies in Canada, as well as the defence, public safety and intelligence community. “…
    “Justice Minister Peter MacKay suggested that the measures would, among a host of other consequences, allow authorities to target materials that may be contributing to the radicalization of Canadians, particularly online.”…
    “CGI’s current $36 million dollar contract with Justice Canada, just one of many”…
    “Similar legislation criminalizing the “glorification” of terrorist acts exists in several European countries, and MacKay said last year that the government was reviewing specific laws in the U.K. as a possible template…On the other hand, it can be helpful to provide resource-strapped counterterrorism forces with additional tools in the uphill battle against homegrown threats. That was the fundamental basis for the laws that were passed in the U.K., and Stewart says Canada’s new legislation could be sculpted in the image of those laws.”…
    “Privacy commissioner Daniel Therrien:
    “This act would seemingly allow departments and agencies to share the personal information of all individuals, including ordinary Canadians who may not be suspected of terrorist activities, for the purpose of detecting and identifying new security threats. It is not clear that this would be a proportional measure that respects the privacy rights of Canadians… I am also concerned that the proposed changes to information sharing authorities are not accompanied by measures to fill gaps in the national security oversight regime.”…
    “CBC News reported earlier this month that the new anti-terror legislation will likely include provisions to allow increased information-sharing between federal agencies, currently limited by privacy laws.”…
    “CGI’s Initiative for Collaborative Government…Government today collaborates with the private sector in executing a broad range of mission functions…Specific examples of “collaborative government” include…public-private partnerships and CROSS-JURISDICTION DATA EXCHANGES, just to name a few. The Initiative is focused on helping federal government agencies capitalize on collaborative government models to enhance mission results.”…
    Member of CGI’s Initiative for Collaborative Government team, Barbara Fast, speaking on behalf of the head of the NSA…
    “The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the United States Coast Guard (USCG) have awarded CGI…The five-year, multiple-award contract has a total value of $11 billion across awardees for a wide range of strategically sourced support services for DHS and its component agencies.”…
    “CGI is launching a Canadian defence, public safety and intelligence unit based on similar efforts in the United States.”…
    CGI’s $25 million dollar contract with our Department of National Defence, just one of many…
    “CGI selected for US$7 billion multiple-award ID/IQ to deliver software and systems engineering to the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command”…
    “CGI awarded US$143 million contract to deliver intelligence support to the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command…Wide-ranging support to help Soldiers prepare for complex operating environments”…
    “CGI awarded US$89.4 million contract to deliver system and software engineering to the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command”…
    & on & on & on…
    “Ottawa Shooting was a Staged Event – False Flag/Hoax – Get Informed Canada!!!”
    …to be continued…

  22. Adding to the substantial evidence I’ve posted in my previous comments proving CGI are the ones behind the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, here is evidence proving that the man that oversaw the unit that trained Cpl. Nathan Cirillo — who was supposed to have been shot and killed during the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax — works for CGI, and has since May of 2012…
    United in mourning at National War Memorial
    All day Thursday, people came to pay their respects, lay flowers and stand in solidarity at the memorial where Cpl. Nathan Cirillo was shot and killed.
    That sentiment was echoed by many others, including former military colonel Robert Kearney, who oversaw the unit that trained Cirillo.
    “He was top-notch, like most Canadians are,” said Kearney, who could think of nothing more “perverse” than what unfolded.
    “It’s sacrilegious to go and attack a soldier up there. What coward comes up and shoots someone like that?” said Kearney. “It’s absolutely terrorism.”…
    Colonel Robert Edward Kearney retired from the Canadian Army in May 2012, from his position as Chief of Joint Domestic Operations for Canada, Canada Command…Colonel Kearney presently serves at CGI as Director of Business Development, Public Safety Portfolio within the Defence, Public Safety, and Intelligence Division. He holds an active Top Secret security clearance with Special Access Level III (Military and Interagency) and Nato Top Secret Cosmic (granted in 2012)…
    “CGI is launching a Canadian defence, public safety and intelligence unit based on similar efforts in the United States.”…
    “This fall, he received what seemed like a perfect assignment: guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Parliament Hill.”…Was Cpl. Nathan Cirillo also a CGI employee…
    Governor General David Johnston, a key member of CGI’s Board of Directors when Stephen Harper appointed him & a major CGI stockholder, gave Colonel Robert Edward Kearney, who retired from the Canadian military to work for CGI in May 2012, a Meritorious Service Medal in November 2012. How many other people has David Johnston bestowed honours on who have a significant connection to CGI…
    “His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, announces the presentation of Military Valour Decorations and Meritorious Service Decorations (Military Division) to members of the Canadian and allied forces. The presentation ceremony will take place on Thursday, November 15, 2012, at 10:30 a.m., at Rideau Hall.”…Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Edward Kearney, M.S.M., C.D.
    Kingston, Ont….
    …convinced yet…?

  23. Continuing with the evidence supporting CGI are the ones responsible for the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax…
    The evidence proves that CGI specialize in lucrative U.S. AND Canadian national defence and military contracts, including helping their military and intelligence clients deliver large-scale, complex simulation/wargames programs…
    “CGI Defense and intelligence
    Delivering mission-critical results in complex environments
    “Since 1976, CGI has helped our military and intelligence clients deliver large-scale, complex programs across logistics, operations, communications, intelligence, systems engineering, military health, training, simulation and infrastructure.
    Our long-standing client relationships in the United States, Canada and Europe—and the many former senior military and intelligence personnel working at CGI…”…
    1. The act or process of simulating.
    2. An imitation; a sham.
    3. Assumption of a false appearance.
    Military simulations, also known informally as war games, are simulations in which theories of warfare can be tested and refined without the need for actual hostilities. Many professional analysts object to the term wargames as this is generally taken to be referring to the civilian hobby, thus the preference for the term simulation.
    Simulations exist in many different forms, with varying degrees of realism. In recent times, the scope of simulations has widened to include not only military but also political and social factors, which are seen as inextricably entwined in a realistic warfare model.
    Whilst many governments make use of simulation, both individually and collaboratively, little is known about it outside professional circles. Yet modelling is often the means by which governments test and refine their military and political policies.”
    “For 38 years, we have partnered with U.S. defense, civilian, and intelligence agencies to support their mission-essential needs.”…FEDERAL MISSION EXPERTISE, Defense, Homeland Security, Intelligence, IN-DEMAND CAPABILITIES, Cybersecurity & Biometrics, Data Exchange and Analytics, Data Center Consolidation, Training & Simulation”…
    “CGI is launching a Canadian defence, public safety and intelligence unit based on similar efforts in the United States.”
    Adrienne Arsenault, Senior Correspondent for CBC – “We can tell you that they may have been surprised by the actual incidents, but not by the concept of them. Within the last month we know that CSIS, the RCMP, the national security task force, all engaged in — they ran a scenario that’s akin to — a wargames exercise, where they actually imagined, literally, an attack in Quebec, followed by an attack in another city, followed by a tip that, “Hey, some guys are coming back — some foreign fighters are coming back from Seria. So they were imagining a worst case scenario, and we’re seeing elements of that happening right now.”
    “Ottawa Shooting Hoax: Federal security chiefs warned days before attack”
    “Cui prodest scelus, is fecit.” The one who derives advantage from the crime is the one most likely to have committed it. ~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca
    The evidence clearly supports that as a direct result of the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax, CGI are guaranteed to get even more contracts with our Department of National Defence, and the RCMP, etc., potentially worth BILLIONS, and even more access to Canadians personal and private information, and even more power and control over Canadians.

    1. The evidence proves CGI are guaranteed to get millions, and potentially BILLIONS, more in contracts with the RCMP and our Department of National Defence, etc., as a direct result of the Ottawa shooting false flag hoax…
      “RCMP to take control of security on Parliament Hill”…
      Members of that tight-knit Commons team, led by former sergeant-at-arms Kevin Vickers, stopped a gunman’s rampage in the Centre Block last October — a show of bravery that was widely hailed by MPs in the House of Commons.
      It’s that very attack that’s prompting the change, the government said Wednesday as it released a motion to be debated later this week that says the time has come for the RCMP to take the lead.
      “The RCMP has access to extensive resources that other forces do not, and has acquired extensive experience in security assessments and the information sharing essential to meeting today’s evolving threats,” said a background document circulated with the motion.”…
      Here are just 8 of the endless contracts with the RCMP Harper and his government have awarded CGI, including 13 contracts awarded in the last period posted, October 1 – December 31, 2014, the period that the Ottawa shooting hoax took place…
      Here are just a dozen of the endless multi-million dollar contracts Harper & his Cons have awarded CGI with our Department of National Defence …

  24. Even the gunman’s mother , Michael Zehaf-Bibeau’s mother, Susan Bibeau, is a government employee connected to CGI…
    “Every day, more details emerge on the tattered adult life of Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau, the 32-year-old Ottawa shooter who slid into criminality and homelessness. He had cut most ties with his divorced parents: his mother, Susan Bibeau, who had risen to the top ranks of the civil service, and his father, who had multiple business interests and shuttled between Montreal and North Africa.”…
    “On April 1, 2009, Susan Bibeau was appointed Director General of the Immigration Division, after performing those duties on an acting basis since July 2008. Effective December 15, 2012, the Director General of the ID became known as the Deputy Chairperson of the ID.”…
    Just a few of the many contracts Harper and his government have awarded CGI with Citizenship and Immigration Canada, the government department that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau’s mother works with…

  25. Aug 19, 2014 Massive Joint Military Training Exercise in Niagara Region Ontario
    Dan Dicks and the PFT team cover Exercise Stalwart Guardian 14 which began on Saturday August 16, 2014 in the Niagara region of Ontario. The military exercise involves several armored regiments and over 2,000 Canadian, American, Scottish and British troops operating in public areas. Stayed tuned to for continuing coverage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *