Terrorism in 2015: Following a False Flag Formula

The terrorist events of 2015 continued to fuel speculation that most terrorism is government-sponsored and focuses on achieving political objectives. A majority of the attacks were attributed to groups located in the relatively small region of southwestern Eurasia that has been the focus of competition for resources among the world’s superpowers. The political will to drive seizure of those resources requires a fear of terrorism so that “responses” can happen without interference from the public. Maintaining the fear is what appears to be the primary objective behind the attacks.

Since 9/11, terrorist acts in Western countries have exhibited a formulaic set of common features that suggest the government might have been involved in the crimes. Here are ten such features.

  1. Evidence against the accused is usually composed of hearsay claims or dubious documents that originate with military or law enforcement sources.
  2. The hearsay evidence typically includes vague accusations that the suspects were in contact with, had “links” to, or made recent pledges of allegiance to, terrorist leaders.
  3. The documentary evidence includes things like passports conveniently left at the scene or social media postings that imply a commitment to terrorism.
  4. There is an overly obvious attempt to associate the terrorists with Islam.
  5. The suspects are usually dead by the time the first reports come out.
  6. People who knew the accused often say they had absolutely no idea that their friend/neighbor/family member was involved or interested in terrorism in any way.
  7. The testimony of eyewitnesses is ignored as authorities provide contradictory stories that quickly become the official, media-driven accounts.
  8. Eyewitnesses often describe the attackers as armed and outfitted like highly trained, and well-supported, special operations soldiers.
  9. The attacks usually coincide with military or law enforcement exercises that mimic what happens.
  10. The incidents are used to justify rapid military attacks against countries of strategic interest before any investigation is conducted.

In 2015, two acts of terrorism in the U.S. were attributed to white men who survived and were not said to be associated with Muslims. These were the June shooting of nine African Americans in a South Carolina church and the November killing of three people at a Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado. But the remaining six terrorist events in the West were all attributed to Muslims. Here are quick summaries of how those terrorist events exhibited the features listed above.

paris-attacks-2Paris in January—The Charlie Hebdo and Kosher Grocery attacks: The first of two major terrorist acts in Paris resulted in a considerable number of as-yet unanswered questions. Not the least of these was that the military-style attackers wore balaclavas to conceal their identities yet left a passport for quick identification. The attackers took pains to associate themselves with Islam yet also displayed professional training like that of special operations soldiers.

Copenhagen in February—Two people were shot dead in separate shootings that were allegedly motivated by art that was disrespectful to Muslims. Police said that Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein committed both crimes and that he died during the second attack. El-Hussein was reported to be well known to Danish intelligence and had been in and out of prison. Despite being sentenced to two years in December 2014 for “serious violence,” he was released in January 2015 and was allegedly engaged in the shootings just two weeks later. Danish citizens have raised questions about the possibility of this being a false-flag attack.

Texas in May—At an anti-Islamic art exhibit featuring images of the Prophet Mohammed in Garland, Texas, two heavily armed gunmen wearing body armor began shooting. One school security officer was shot in the ankle before both of the alleged attackers were killed. The two men had police records and one was the subject of an FBI investigation.

Australia in October—In Parramatta, a 15-year old boy was said to shoot a police employee after visiting a mosque and listening to a lecture by an extremist Islamist leader (according to police). Although Australian authorities called it an act of political terrorism, like most 15-year olds the boy was not politically active and the lecture he attended was about “charity and how to worship God and help others.” His family and friends had no idea that he had any violent tendencies.

Paris in November—In a coordinated series of attacks, terrorists killed 130 people. Just two days later, before an investigation was completed, France began a new bombing campaign in Syria. Only one of the ten suspects, Saleh Abdeslam, survived the attacks. He was first questioned and released by French authorities, even when it was known that he had rented a car used in the crimes. It was reported that Belgian authorities later let him escape. In November it was revealed that Paris police were engaged in a mass shooting exercise the very morning of the attacks.

California in December—The San Bernardino Shootings: The only eyewitness to the shootings said the perpetrators were three tall, athletic, white men in combat-style gear. The witnesses to the getaway said they saw three men in black masks fleeing the scene with rifles in hand. Another said it was three white men in military gear. The attackers got into a black SUV with tinted windows and “calmly” left the scene. Despite these eyewitness reports, the official account quickly became that two small, brown-skinned Muslim people committed the crimes. A few days later, President Obama promoted the new myth without proper investigation or trial and took pains to remind the nation that, “Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11.”

Citizens later learned that there are glaring questions that remain unanswered about the San Bernardino shootings but the media frenzy in support of the government account had already become an entrenched myth. Even as the New York Times retracted reporting on the subject and the Washington Post admitted that American law enforcement officials were “famous for feeding contradictory and unfounded information to the media,” the myth continued to go unchallenged.

Despite the fact that government-sponsored false flag terrorism has been well documented as a fact throughout modern history, terrorism remains a powerful tool for controlling public opinion. The events of 2015 have shown that the propaganda tools for presenting terrorism are being continually refined. The formula used by government and media to report new accounts of terrorism may one day become so well tuned that it will be effective in presenting anyone as a terrorist with little or no actual evidence. It would therefore be wise for all citizens to question all acts of terrorism in order to prevent greater abuses of power.

This entry was posted in 9/11 and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Terrorism in 2015: Following a False Flag Formula

  1. Dikranovich says:

    wait, so some people said they saw three white men fleeing the scene in San Bernardino, and that is suppose to be rock solid evidence, yet when people see a big AA on an airliner, then we are suppose to believe that what they actually saw was a cruise missile?

    I saw the Danish “nano thermite expert” doing an interview and I was shocked at the absurdity of the whole thing. It was really beyond the pale of reason.

    • mikecorbeil says:


      You were surprised by what Niels Harrit or Harritt said? If so, then what the heck are your qualifications? You surely would have none that’re noteworthy. But, maybe you just worded your post a “little” oddly.

    • Daniel Noel says:

      This blog is meant for readers who understand modern terrorism’s essence. If you wish to explore organized disinformation, you may want to explore the elementary class. Start by assuming minimal disinformation and ponder TV’s worldwide failure to duly report on the unique, sudden, rapid and complete self-destruction of a certain skyscraper due to an office fire.


    • tg says:

      Can you link what you saw and be more specific on what was absurd?

  2. Lee Anderson says:

    Strategic resource control in oil rich countries serves double purpose of advancing military bases around Russia and China. This does not portend well.

    Please read today’s Heresy here youtopia.guru

    • mikecorbeil says:

      It’s not just about oil, but it is one of the profitable natural resources rich and influentially powerful “elites” of the west wish to have control over. It doesn’t matter what the resource is. If it’s profitable, especially very, then they, these people, want control and it’s obvious that they’ll go to insane extremes to gain this. I think the following documentary of 71 minutes provided by James Corbett, editor of CorbettReport.com, on Dec. 27, 2015, is lacking a little information, but it otherwise is interesting.

      “How Big Oil Conquered the World”,

      I’m not historian at all, so certainly not about any industry, but the above documentary, while I think it might be lacking a little, is interesting. Am I right or mistaken about it being interesting? I don’t know. As stated, I’m not historian.

      • Lee Anderson says:

        You are absolutely correct about the above video being extremely interesting. I study this stuff over and over and write about it, yet I still have a lot to learn. What is interesting is the Rockefeller clan started out in oil and turned to banking, the Rothschild’s started out in banking and expanded into oil. Between the two families, and their supporters, They have curtailed the advancement of green technologies, and have engineered debt as a matter of fact for most all human beings. The enforce their ability to create money as debt and remain superior in power and authority to their respective countries by utmost violence and media control.

        Please go to http://youtopia.guru/
        To see the solution, to see their Achilles heel revealed. They need catastrophic events to sway public opinion, and they gave us one to use against them, so let’s do it.

  3. Excellent, lucid logic in your article! Thank you for taking the time to word this so powerfully. No mainstream news source can be bothered to have the basic human curiosity (an essential element of real journalism) and thereby arrive at the desperately-important observations which you have made. Keep up the excellent work! –Paul

    • Daphne says:

      Pauly your obviously in denial. Oh and by the way you are just like your name! There’s insight for you! Your obviously on a suicide mission.

      • mikecorbeil says:


        What is Pauly in denial about? Also, what’s wrong with naming oneself Pauly? The “deathwish” part might be questionable, if you wish to question it, but what’s wrong with a man or woman calling themselves Pauly? More important, however, is what you think Pauly is in denial about, for his/her comment is fine. I don’t think of Kevin as any kind of journalist, as I’ve already and separately explained. But, what you see wrong with Pauly’s comment is presently “beyond me”.

      • Your and you’re are two distinctly different words. You really seem determined to use them interchangeably…one for the other. THAT is scary. Either you had trouble with high school English, or you are yet to matriculate. Sorry friend: bad grammar indicates a bungler. Hard for me to shake in my boots knowing you probably left your [sic] keys in your [sic encore] front door. –Paul

    • mikecorbeil says:

      True about msm journalism, but I don’t know that saying Kevin is a journalist is quite fitting; regardless of msm or alternative. I just think of him as an individual who writes and tries to inform us all about important things. He is of a scientific background and I have difficulty with considering him even an alternative media source. Instead, he’s more individual, I figure.

      • mikecorbeil says:

        Individuality is important. I can elaborate on this topic but will leave at this.

      • ajlucientes says:

        Kevin Ryan, from his technical analyses and critiques of NIST’s ‘work’ (numerous video presentations, from the 11 min ‘NIST WTC 7 Report is False’ to numerous more comprehensive ones), his groundbreaking 4-part ‘Demolition Access To The WTC’ series of essays, his work on ‘Active Thermtic Material Found In the Dust of the WTC Catastrophe..’ Harrit et. al. 2009, work on numerous other papers at Journal of 911 Studies, not to mention the site itself, to his book monumental book: Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 911 Suspects, has been a literal tour de force responsible for more solid investigative journalism into 9-11 than the whole of the mainstream and the vast majority alternative media combined. The ability to speak the truth about the 911/anthrax attacks publicly is the litmus for our time. Period. It alone separates a journalist from a paid mouthpiece.
        ‘Let it not be said we did nothing.’ Don Paul.
        if one cannot honestly address the watershed event of our time, whatever other good work people like Rachel Maddow, Amy Goodman, Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy “and I say this after having watched Loose Change’ Schahill, Noam Chomsky etc,, may have done, none can escape the complicity their silence makes them guilty of.

      • Yes, sorry. I just meant to convey that this piece puts everyone with a Pulitzer in journalism to shame. Cheers! –Paul

      • mikecorbeil says:

        ajlucientes and paulydeathwish : First, Pauly…, I guess to be able to agree with you, just that I’m aware of far too few Pulitzer price winners.

        ajlucientes, I recognise that Kevin is scientific, a very good writer and one of the very top 9/11 Truth contributors providing highly important analyses. I just don’t think of him as a “journalist”.

  4. mikecorbeil says:

    Agreed. Short but good article. And it’s good to have these reminders from time to time, in case some of us become somnolent. It could potentially happen to me, for there’s little of world scope that happens where I reside; and while that might seem or feel good in some ways, we need to stay aware, as much as possible, of what’s going on on the larger, broader scales.

    Anyway, short but good article.

  5. mikecorbeil says:

    And the last paragraph seems to be one worth being often repeated.

    Quote: “the propaganda tools for presenting terrorism are being continually refined”.

    Now that is very worrisome or worrying. I’d like to say that you’re “kidding”, but if I did that and truly believed it, then I’d have to be fooling myself.

    This is a “rat hole” that even rats don’t want to enter.

  6. Agent76 says:


    It’s the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times; creating the enemies you need.


  7. Agent76 says:

    Dec 2, 2015 Ever Wonder Why the Most Mass Shootings Ever Have Happened Under Obama?

    When compiling the data for mass shootings (where four or more people have died as per FBI definition of mass murder) under the last five presidents, clearly there’s a startling outlier under the Obama administration. Largest push for gun control in American history just so happens to coincide at a time when there are more mass shootings than ever before in American history. What are the odds?

    Dec 2, 2015 San Bernardino shooting WITNESS 41NBC ‘They were all white men’

  8. tg says:

    In the book Fahrenheit 451 when the mechanical hound can’t find the protagonist it switches it’s target to the oddball who was just going for a walk. The image is then manipulated to look like the protagonist.

    As an oddball that always struck me as unfair.

  9. marvinsannes says:

    The events always lack the markers of rule-of-law, rarely an indictment, an investigation by TV personalities, never a trial, never grand jury testimony, never hear witnesses under oath, no courtroom, no lawyers, no judges, no jury, etc. We know what happened from the TV within hours, and the event becomes history in Wiki the following week. Orwellian history.

  10. Daniel Noel says:

    “It would therefore be wise for all citizens to question all acts of terrorism.” Certainly. However, wisdom is hard to instill in people who can’t draw intelligent conclusions from Building 7’s video record.

    I’ll segue by remarking that among the probable false flags of 2015 and earlier years, there has been no live TV broadcast of an alleged incident, as if their authors feared that the strategy of televising like the Twin Towers’ terrorist controlled demolition was too daring.


  11. Ort says:

    I belatedly suggest that the alleged incident of “mass ‘rape'” in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, which occurred just before this article was published, is another ambiguous event riddled with uncertainty and contradiction.

    Samuel Clemens, aka “Mark Twain”, famously observed that “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

    The Cologne New Year’s Eve story is another regrettable proof of this axiom; if the present-day perpetual technology-driven mass-media frenzy had existed in Twain’s era, he might have added
    that the bigger the lie, and the more momentum it gains, the faster it travels.

    I do not claim to know the “real truth” of the Cologne events, including the extent to which the discrepancies are evidence of false-flag planning vs. irresponsible and hysterical reporting. However, I have noticed that the story passed through two stages:

    First, there was a sudden eruption of “breaking news” reports– which, like “breaking wind”, are always filled with foul impurities. That is, the news reports themselves simply “reported the ambiguity” by circulating extremely fraught/”loaded” descriptions of a macabre and atrocious mass attack, primarily consisting of violent sexual harassment and assault, by a teeming horde of “North Africans/Arabs”.

    The initial reporting was accompanied by the now-obligatory inclusion of amateur social media videos, tweets, etc. These consisted of blurry/redacted video glimpses of people moving and shouting chaotically in the night.

    With many “breaking news” reports of crisis and catastrophe, in succeeding days at least some factual details gradually replace the early sketchy and frankly hysterical reporting. Here, however, the Gothic horror story simply spun in place all week. Instead of dispassionate and credible follow-ups, both corporate/mainstream and “alternative” media simply added a lot of would-be “expert” analysis, and plenty of person-in-the-street interviews with Cologne residents and EU politicians that tacitly accepted the initial reports at face value.

    By the following week, a second phase of coverage began. I’m citing one particular article here only because it summed up a sudden “settled wisdom” that purported to clear up the entire matter. “Sexual Terrorism In The Heart Of Europe” by Andrew Korybko, a “Russia Insider” contributor, was published on January 8th at the “traditionalist” (i.e., culturally/socially reactionary) Saker site. I’m not including a link, since it’s easily searchable if anyone is interested; here’s the salient excerpt:
    “In what might be the first time this has happened in recent memory, it appears as though all media outlets reporting on this attack are in agreement about every one of the facts. It’s universally recognized that around 1000 teenagers and young men of Mideast and North African heritage descended on a crowded square in Cologne right outside the local train station and historical church. In the pandemonium that soon followed, this riotous gang used glass bottles and fireworks to intimidate the locals that were present and then proceeded to systematically grope as many of the women that were there as possible. Some of the victims were even raped, and one account states that the helpless women were forced to run a gauntlet of unspeakable terror as hundreds of frenzied “refugees” grabbed every part of their body as they could while the victims haphazardly attempted to flee to safety. […]
    I don’t think I need to bother deconstructing this supposedly sophisticated and erudite analyst’s preposterous tribute to “all media outlets” miraculously concurring on “every one of the facts”. I’ll only note in passing that a less credulous mind might suspect that at least some of those “facts” are the usual agenda-driven pernicious factoids that seed every political crisis– and wonder whether this happy mass-media consensus might be explained as something other than a coincidental convergence of high-quality journalism.

    This analysis was echoed by various “experts”, who further reified this supposed “consensus” by declaring that the Cologne events were neither more nor less than a particularly virulent demonstration of the Arabic gang-rape “Taharrush” phenomenon which sees women surrounded by groups of men in crowds and sexually assaulted.

    Again, I don’t pretend to know what really happened. But I do know that this second phase that purported to clarify and explain what happened introduced a narrative that exacerbates xenophobic hysteria and neatly diverts the focus and discourse away from the crucial holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions in the story.

    I try to resist sentimental, even romantic, generalizations. So I don’t reflexively dismiss the possibility that refugees/immigrants, like everybody else, are capable of madness and badness. But I deeply distrust the emerging top-down, media-driven summary of events.

    This situation also conforms to the pattern Kevin sets forth in the post, insofar as now the mass-media reporting and commentary merely has to cite “Cologne New Year’s Eve ‘mass rapes'” as if there were no dispute about what actually happened; there’s a manufactured pseudo-consensus.

    And it isn’t just Western mass-media infoganda. For instance, even RT News uses an amateur video clip as a visual cue for Cologne-related stories. Ironically, and appallingly, even this thematic material is devoid of any evidence of violence; it appears to be taken in the square outside the cathedral, and shows dark and blurry glimpses of people milling about or walking past while fireworks are being shot off in the background.

    To me, it looks very much like someone was trying to innocuously record the fireworks on a smartphone or other hand-held device. There are no feral “Arab or North African”-looking figures raising hell anywhere in the video. But because of the dodgy narrative created around the actual events, that’s the association credulous and under-informed viewers make.

    To anyone capable of critical thinking and healthy skepticism, it’s obvious that there is more to these events than the contrived and streamlined narratives promoted by official sources and their mass-media partners and servants.

  12. windjammer says:

    False flag terrorism feeds a beast that is extremely well funded now, but will always have to up the ante to capture the masses’ incredulous belief. What will be the next one – an EMP killshot or even an alien invasion? It’ll be whatever the deep state thinks it can pull off to finance it’s own perpetuation. Here’s Stephen Greer’s latest 3hr expose of the deep state, and it’s surprising how many of the same corporations that Kevin tags for serious investigation are involved in the emerging UFO disclosures:

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s