Government authorities and media lie so much that if you unquestioningly believe anything they say, then you must want to be deceived - and you are the real problem. As explained by Osho, an enlightened zen master, “There are millions of people who are ready to be deceived, who are simply waiting for someone to come and deceive them - because of their beliefs, dogmas, because of their vicious desires, because of their greed.” It is no exaggeration to say belief in the media and government is necessary for any event where there are few first hand accounts and only partial video. Dead terrorists can't talk but authorities and their media probots want us to believe that these cold killers conveniently leave behind unauthenticated web pages, manifestos or crime diaries that contain complete confessions to crimes or they present us with other inculpatory, unverifiable hearsay from unknown persons or sources. Where the terrorist is still alive and captured government authorities generally issue an immediate press release or provide a full recorded, instant confession to the whole affair.
That is, generally speaking, in false flag operations authorities want us to believe that a terrorist pre-meditated a carefully planned and timed crime that considered every detail except a getaway plan or a way to conceal their identity (wearing a mask). We are further told that despite all the rational and meticulous planning the criminal irrationally desired to get caught and then be killed in order to have their story told, which couldn’t be done another way. Unlike all other criminals, these cold killers are special because they also snitch on themselves without being asked a single question by police. Only law enforcement officers have such comic book style thinking and envision a Hollywood ending where the villain is quickly apprehended without issue (see the Dylann Roof slow speed chase).
Now, elites have added engraved bullet casings and messages written on guns into the false flag mix. For instance, the so-called Buffalo Supermarket killer wrote “nigger” on the gun he used to murder black shoppers. Right. New tools are necessary to deceive the public because “manifestos” (a word only law enforcement would use, no one used it before the Christopher Dorner episode) or crime diaries are difficult to authenticate. The falsity of the manifesto jeopardizes the entire false flag. For one thing, a writing cannot be authenticated as being from a particular person merely because it bears his name or is on is letterhead or website. The writing also must have distinctive characteristics with consistent internal patterns which would include its appearance, contents and peculiarities such as spelling or mispelling, use of jargon, punctuation, syntax, paragraph structure, etc. Like Dylann Roof’s manifesto, most manifestos appear to be written by multiple authors (agents) using various styles, grammar etc. and contain inconsistent content. Upon any scrutiny manifestos are revealed to be government fiction. Rather than deal with such “reality entanglement” authorities and their media will now use bullet casings and guns with messages on them, which they stupidly believe is more effective method to deceive the public.
Scrutiny of events as false flags is non-existent in the dependent media (and its copy cat media). These stories become instant truth without questioning because it is considered wrong to question the media narrative (which parrots the government narrative). Also, there are no contested trials (Dylann Roof was unrepresented during his murder trial, so it was uncontested- he had legal representation only for his sentencing. Similarly, the Black crisis actor in Waukesha was also unrepresented during his murder trial) and the Parkland shooter merely had a sentencing hearing, not a trial. At any rate, due to the fact that “the shooter” is nearly always killed or pleads guilty, there is no need for an actual adversarial trial with discovery, rigorous cross examination, scrutiny of witnesses, evidence and statements in a forum where evidentiary rules would be applied to so-called evidence and the government would be forced to prove the event really occurred beyond a reasonable doubt.
