Friday, 15 July 2016

Nice Lorry Massacre

Just a few simple questions: 

  • Why are all the bullet holes in the windscreen on the passenger side in a presumably LEFT HAND DRIVE French registered lorry?
  • Why was it allowed to enter a prohibited traffic area without being challenged?
  • How was it permitted to travel so far (at least 2 Km) before it was finally stopped?
  • Where was even minimal security on the day?
  • Why did all the news reports say the driver got down from the cab and exchanged gun shots when this clearly didn't happen?

Before I get into the guts of the article this video is an absolutely must see.
Its subject is a woman called Einat Wilf, ex-Israeli soldier and MP (amongst other things)

She just happens to be the wife of the man who just happened to be the man who was in the right place, at the right time, to record the one video used by ALL the media outlets, of the moment a motor cyclist allegedly tried to stop the lorry before it sped off.

His name is Richard Gutjahr and he is a professional journalist with strong connections to America.

They have been married since 2007.

The scenario replicates previous cases where Israel-connected individuals were up and ready to record what becomes the definitive video of the event. 

This must prove prior knowledge at least. And prior knowledge points to complicity.

Please let this information sink in before you read the article.

Lorry, riddled with bullet holes, with an ambulance, police van and police officers alongside, at the attack scene.

Reservations about recent spate of 'terrorist incidents'

We have to be hugely objective when it comes to "terrorist incidents", in particularly America and Europe. It has been demonstrated beyond peradventure, that the majority following 9/11 (which was of course an inside job and criminal fraud never properly investigated) were not as officially described. France since at least 2012 has become the unfortunate location for this phenomenom. Some say linked to its intention to support the Palestinian cause.

'Chevaline Massacre' and its implications

This I believe can be dated from at least 2012, the year of the notorious "Chevaline Massacre" which had clear Muslim and Middle East espionage connotations. It overflowed in official misinformation and incompetence, pointing to state complicity in cause and cover-up. 

Of course despite assurances by both the British Prime Minister, David Cameron and French President, Francis Hollande - they were conveniently meeting in London on the very day (for current parallels see below) - and an unprecidented police investigation on both sides of the English Channel, it led nowhere and to no one responsible. It has since been quietly filed under "unsolved murders". Every time it seems there is an incident, promises are made that "lessons will be learned", and the causes understood. They seldom are. The official French policy is now "to neutralise" the assailant rather than capture or arrest him - which rather conveniently in case of fraud, removes the chance of discovery or revelation.

Foreign Policy and War.

As I said at the time, I thought this incident had much wider and deeper implications. I now believe it marked the beginning of a covert operation within the French State itself, probably with the cooperation and collusion of other State secret intelligence agencies, within the context of proxy wars in Libya (bombed by Britain and France in 2011) and Syria (civil war also started in 2011). 

The object of both campaigns was to oust the political leaders, successful in the case of Gaddafi, so far unsuccessful in the case of Assad. In both of these there is evidence of collaboration with Israel, guilty of war crimes in Gaza in 2008/9 ('Operation Cast Lead') and 2014 ('Operation Protective Edge'), uncondemned by the West. Note below the Putin/Kerry meeting in Moscow to discuss the issue on the very same day!

So this was the context of the two high-profile incidents in Paris in January  (Charlie Hebdo) and November, 2015 (Paris Stade de France and other locations)  This was quickly followed by explosions at Brussels airport and underground. As I and others have demonstrated, there are many aspects of these events that suggest unreliability, including proven lies by the French authorities. 

Because of this, in these and all the other well known "terrorist events" in America and Britain, official versions of them cannot be trusted. They may contain elements that are true and accurate, mixed with those intended to deceive and shift responsibility. Nor can mainstream media (MSM) be relied upon for accuracy. Time and again, it merely acts as a conduit for the official narrative, pouring scorn on those that question it, as with 9/11 and 7/7. A typical BBC response is appended.

So it is in this light that sadly, we must assess the latest outrage in the South of France, in which it is claimed no less than 84 people have been killed (murdered?) and many more injured by an individual of north African and Muslim origins, a certain 'Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani', who helpfully left his identity documents in the cab. (Now apparently "Mohammed Abu-amal" "known to police for petty crime") (NEW REPORT HIS NAME IS MOHAMED BOUHLEL?)

Please note yet again the alleged perpatrator of the crime "was known to police", yet not it would appear enough to allow them to intercept and prevent a major disaster?

Changes in such detail, particularly when it is claimed he left his identification documents in the cad, need to be treated with a great deal of suspicion. The role of assets and/or patsies is well documented. (For Webster Tarpley's exposition see:

How should we approach the Nice outrage?

How should we approach the incident therefore? First and foremost with respect and sympathy for those affected. However we should never allow this to cloud our judgement or to accept official statements unconditionally. Indeed in view of earlier deception we need to be positively critical of them.

Much, if not most, of what has been reported might well be accurate. However amidst the genuine, can be planted the opposite, such as pre-prepared elements. More importantly and as inconceivable as it might seem, the whole exercise may be organised by 'deep-state' or foreign elements quite different to those accused. Only careful analysis of video and of all statements and other features can point to deception if it exists.

Nor can the possibility that the driver or the vehicle was under some sort of psychological or technological remote control cannot be ruled out. Indeed was the claimed assassin in the cab at all, or if he was whether he was conscious or alive? If he was there and alive before he was shot dead, where is the video evidence to prove it.

And how with so many bullet holes through the windscreen was he able as one witness relayed by the BBC, able "to reverse" the vehicle at one stage? 

Apparently there were guns and grenades found in the back of the lorry (a repeat of a false Paris thread incidentally). Is there video evidence of them being removed? And if the purpose was to run people down en masse, why would weapons be kept in the back?

Just a few questions someone might like to answer?

The first important consideration is TIMING!

An innocent bystander?

The first video is always of interest and may be indicative of deeper issues. Richard Gutjahr - eye witness featured on BBC lunchtime news who's video of the lorry was widely used. Strangely he was cut off on the first attempt to interview to him. Then a little later he was again cut off half way through. Andrew Plant the BBC correspondent had no such difficulty. 

It raises a question why it was problematic for the one and not the other? Did the BBC have two camera teams and why was Gutjahr not physically located with Plant?

More important, and not mentioned by the BBC, Gutjahr is not your 'average Joe' who as luck would have it, captured the scene, but a well known and prominent journalist with strong links to American CNN and academic institutions. From we have this:

"between 1998 and 1999 on a semester program of the American University in Washington in part." Then "From January 1999, he spent five months as a trainee for the CNN office in Washington."

Of course it would be quite wrong to assume  in any way he came under the influence of the CIA at this time.  From this we see (yet again) interesting links to Israel: 

"....Cairo during the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 known. Here, Gutjahr decided spontaneously and without authority to spend time in Israel to travel to Cairo." 

Oh yes it goes further! The above link reports (verbatim translation: Gutjahr is the former Israeli since 2007 Knesset -Abgeordneten Einat Wilf married.") 

So we may conclude that the person who happens to be in the right place at the right time and who supplies the critical video that goes viral around the world, is actually a professional journalist and blogger with obvious links to organisations closely alligned to both American and Israeli secret intelligence agencies! 

This, I am sure you will agree, is beyond coincidental, particularly when considered in the light of the fact it precisely replicates what happened, as I have previously demonstrated at Charlie Hebdo, the Bataclan AND Brussels!!! (There is a search box at the top if you want to look it up)

This fact alone must, even at this early stage, give rise to serious and very worrying questions, as to whom was aware of what was likely to happen and whom was actually behind the event.

Now for some other timing coincidences.

It was France's national BASTILE DAY redolent with significance for the French State and people. The day in 1789 when the hated prison in France was stormed and prisoners set free as part of the ensuing revolution that deposed the King and pressaged a reign of terror as well as new-found freedoms. 

It also sent waves of panic around Europe and particularly in England. 

Is it significant that only the day before this recent attack, a new Prime Minister and Cabinet was installed intent on leaving the EU following a referendum that voted by a narrow margin 'out'? 

Indeed on the very day Theresa May was meeting the Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon (recently wooed by the EU) in Edinburgh to discuss the practical implications. 

Mrs May, who has for five years been (nominally) in charge of MI5, immediately made the usual noises about Muslim terrorist threat and the need to guard against it, without a blink of the eye.

One wonders if she or MI5 take that view in private?

An American/Russian Summit Meeting to discuss Syria

Another important meeting was taking place on the same day as well. In fact much more important. It was between the American Secretary of State John Kerry and both Sergei Lavrov and President Putin.

From Reuters ( we have this quote: 

"Kerry "emphasized that absent concrete, near-term steps, diplomatic efforts could not continue indefinitely," a statement said, adding that discussions between Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Friday were expected to explore initiatives in more detail.

On Thursday, the Washington Post published a leaked document it said Kerry would put forward in Moscow calling for intelligence sharing to identify leadership targets, training camps, supply lines and headquarters of the Nusra Front, al Qaeda's affiliate in Syria.

It said strikes against those targets could be carried out by U.S. or Russian jets and expanded coordination would be channeled through a Joint Implementation Group based in the vicinity of the Jordanian capital, Amman."

The very same day, you notice of the terrorist outrage in Nice. Quite amazing! 

It should be noted that Al Nusra Front has been actively supported by Israel in the north of the country and that Amman has been used by the Americans and British to supply and train ISIS assets, a fact that has been largely kept secret from the British public. 

So again we see repeated the coterminous events on the world stage of significance to Israel, and factual links to them in the area of prior knowledge and propaganda. Too coincidental you may think.

Whether Kerry is 'playing a straight bat' to Putin's bowling (or is it the other way around?) is open to discussion. It seems pretty certain that without Putin on the scene in Syria, America would have launched a full-scale attack years ago in cooperation with ISIS forces not against them. No doubt Britain and France would have been keen to tag along, in spite of what we now know from Chilcot, about the Iraq invasion.

Final Observations

One final point (I am sure there will be many more anomalies spotted by observers but unpublicised by the MSM) the celebratory event and its aftermath reminded me of Boston, generally recognised by everyone as a False Flag Event engineered by the US government. It has some trademark features including scenes of panic and injured, some of which may be contrived.

In the Nice case the way the lorry starts its run slowly and then speeds up perfectly positioned in front of said cameraman, requires explanation. 

How the lorry came to be there on a road that had been cordoned off for the festivities without being stopped by barriers or challenged by stewards or police also needs answering. This is a nation after all, is a nation on high alert. 

Again not one question about the apparent total failure of secret agencies and police to implement even the simplest precautionary measures at a major event on a major day. If they can't even do that what are they good for? There is of course an alternative explanation.

Immediately after the event, the existing and 'temporary' State of Emergency that was coming to an end, was extended for a further three months. Who after Nice would oppose it, but what given Nice, is its purpose or efficacy? 

What could this all mean? We may learn more truth (or not?) as time goes by.

Frank Gardiner for the BBC did this assessment:

"This is not the first time in recent years that someone has deliberately driven a truck into pedestrians on a French street. But the scale, speed and death toll from this apparent attack are unprecedented.
It follows a call by so-called Islamic State (IS) spokesman Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani some months ago for IS followers to do exactly what this truck driver did. This, and other calls for attacks in Europe, are partly in response to the significant losses being experienced by IS to the shrinking territory it controls in Syria and Iraq.
US-led airstrikes, including by French warplanes, are taking a particularly heavy toll there. At home, France has become the number one target of opportunity for IS and its supporters, unperturbed by the national state of emergency that has just been extended."
No group has so far said it was behind the attack; prosecutors said the inquiry would be handled by anti-terror investigators.
AFP reported that the identity papers of a 31-year-old French-Tunisian were found in the truck, citing an unnamed police source.
Local media reports named the man as Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, but his identity has not yet been confirmed."
This image appears suspiciously 'theatrical'. Why a doll next to what appears to be a moribund adult? It has obviously been visited by emergency personnel, as it is wrapped in survival blanket. If severely injured it would not have been left in that situation. On the other hand if life had departed the body why is the blanket pulled back from the head? For some reason the doll's legs are not in the pink trouser suit.
A body is seen on the ground July 15, 2016 after a truck ran into a crowd celebrating the Bastille Day national holiday July 14.

Following from:
"Local newspaper Nice-Matin reported the man had firearms and grenades in the lorry with him at the time of the attack.
According to the AFP news agency, which quoted a police source, the man has been identified by papyers (sic) found inside the cab of the lorry. The papers indicate the man was a resident of Nice, AFP reported. The attack, which came eight months and a day after Isis gunmen and suicide bombers killed 130 people in Paris, appeared so far to be the work of a lone assailant."


"Miss Mecollari said her brother saw a man with a smart blue shirt and a beard driving the lorry as he “laughed manically”.

She said: “We started seeing people getting trampled and he was swerving the truck around. “As he was doing that, people were flying 15ft in the air like cannonballs. All you could hear was shouting and screaming, mothers pushing their kids with their strollers and him laughing like a maniac.”
Here is his published image. Had he changed from clean shaven to bearded?


An Eye-Witness Account

I have now just come across this interview of an alleged "eye witness" by the name of Eric Drattell, who was on the beach at the time with his wife. The first strange thing I noticed about it was part of the description.

From his Facebook page he publishes this image of himself:

Also from his Facebook page publically shared on the 7th February, 2016 we have this intriguing entry or just a humourous, innocent entry regarding industrial action on the London Underground:

Dodged that bullet. Only four more planned strikes in the next few weeks

and this one following the Paris attack on the 13th November, 2015:

Eric Drattell updated his profile picture.

He says, "We were on the beach. We recognised the pop pop sound of gunfire. My wife who is deaf recognised the sounds as gunfire." By any assessment this seems very strange. Not that, "I recognised the sounds as gunfire" but his deaf wife?!! (Listen here:

The next thing I noticed was that on a different 'France 24' You Tube clip (here: the editors appear to have deleted the word "recognised" from the above identical (scripted) description. It appears someone had noticed the dubious content and had got rid of it before broadcasting it.

Notice how in this 'Russia Today' quote here: it leaves out the mention that his wife is deaf. "“The fireworks went off and they were terrific and were just in the process of paying our dinner bill and all of a sudden we heard the puff-puff-puff, my wife … recognized that it is gunfire and we started running for the shelter,” he said."

Several stations on Youtube carry an identically (scripted?) interview, despite the fact that they were from different sources and interviewers. We are familiar with hundreds of TV stations not only carrying the same stories but even with identical introductory script but identical 'live' interviews? Different live interviews even with the same person would surely evidence small differences in content, emphasis and expression absent with this one.

This can only be explained in terms of carefully prepared scripted set-up that immediately raises questions of authenticity and reliability.

Mr Drattell says he was in a restaurant about three metres below the Promanade Englaise. That with about a hundred other people they sheltered in the tunnel.  "We were in the shelter area for an hour and a half, maybe two hours" he says. They were told several times to get back in by police but eventually were evacuated to a hotel several hundred yards to the east. When they came out of there "only an hour before the interview" they witnessed "bodies and blood everywhere".

"For a time," he says, "my wife and I were in a toilet stall, with about ten people total, trying to take cover as we weren't sure what was happening. Everybody seems pretty shell-shocked." (A group confined in a small space, even toilets, and 'hostages' has become a familiar theme in these events you may have noticed)

However in the France 24 interview (here: later on when he appears to have moved away from the 'script', the account differes in a significant respect.

Now the "bodies and blood everywhere" changes to the following: "So we did see some of the scene. Ahhh, most I was able to see was a body and lots debris and a stroller's pram that had been rolled over and uuum saw a street sign - a street light - that had been knocked over." "We're trying to get to our hotel but the police are blocking that road."

Interviewer: "Clearly this was a horrific scene. We hear the driver descended from his cab shooting. Can you tell us anything about that?"

He replies: "We didn't see that. We were three metres below the street." but he adds, "I believe the truck was stopped right in front of the hotel" (where he is staying) and the police are blocking his return there.

Mr Drattell, if it is the same gentleman, is a lawyer who is the General Counsel & Head of Legal & Corporate Affairs, Risk Management Solutions and was previously with
Cisco Systems,
Sun Microsystems,
McDermott, Will & Emery (Linkedin here: )
One of his many responsibilities is given as: "• Responsible for public relations and internal communications, which integrate messaging across media platforms."
One of his 'influencers' he states is:

Daniel Solove

Organizer, Privacy+Security Forum + Professor, GW Law School + CEO, TeachPrivacy
  1. Privacy + Security Forum
  2. George Washington University Law School
  3. TeachPrivacy
  1. Hogan Lovells
  2. Seton Hall Law School
  3. U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
  1. Yale Law School
This is confirmed on his twitter account here ( 
" Jul 14
Lots of debris on road. Saw one body"

Apparently he had been on holiday for two weeks, first in Paris and had been in Nice since the previous Saturday to watch the Euro match.

More from his Twitter feed on the day in question raises some questions though:

  1. we've been evacuated along with everyone sheltered at Sporting plage restaurant
  2. being moved back into shelter. Any news above ground?
  3. . Being told to get back into sheltered area
  4. terrorists jumped off truck opened fire on place d'anglais. No news on injured or dead
  5. terror attack. Linda and I are safe below street. Any news?
  6. Terror attack in Nice France. We're OK

Here you notice despite his denial in the France 24 interview that he knew anything about the final moments of the driver shoot out because "he was three metres below on the beach" whist clearly still down there for later tweets confirm it, he is able to state: "terrorists jumped off truck opened fire on place d'anglais. No news on injured or dead." This conflict is very difficult to explain. How as he states, could he possibly have known whether the driver jumped down or not so why post this very specific piece of information? Indeed how would he have even known at that stage a van was involved? After all they only heard the "pop pop pop of gunshots" so where did the idea of a van come from? In any event in the later interview he specifically denies knowledge of those details. Very strange! 
Might it indicate tampering with the Twitter feed at some stage by persons other than him to tie in with a certain agreed narrative, pushed relayed by all media outlets that the "driver jumped down from the cab and exchanged fire". This line of course subsequently positively disproved by video here:

Then from ( ) we have this slightly different account:
"To escape, some of the fleeing crowd leaped down from the promenade to the beach several yards below.
That's where Eric Drattell and his wife were sitting at a beachside restaurant. The couple, Americans who live in London, were also vacationing in Nice, enjoying a nice night of fireworks and a meal.
"You go from having an absolutely marvelous time to sheer terror in a blink of an eye, literally," he told All Things Considered.
Drattell's wife was injured by someone diving off the promenade. The couple took cover in a restroom. When they left, hours later, they saw a stroller that had been crushed, and dead bodies lying in the street.
"It was unbelievable carnage," he said.


  1. Confirmation the the 'English Promenade'(!) had been closed to traffic many hours before. This witness expresses "surprise the lorry could have got on it" as I suggested above before watching this.

  2. There are similarities with the Apeldoorn Queens day terrorist attack, allegedly on the Dutch royal family, where the alleged terrorist ended up hitting an obelisk. I just now Googled on obelisque nice promenade terrorist, and, surprise:,7.2689177,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x12cddaa23b493dfd:0x4cc894a93067bec!8m2!3d43.6950662!4d7.2711064

    This article is interesting, too, even though 77 dead is now 84:

    As was predicted in the inside drawing of the 2016 issue of the Economist, 2016 is being littered with false flags (arrows).

  3. and now 16.7.2016)
    an attempted military coup in Turkey. Make of it what you may.

  4. Now from the British 'Independent' newspaper this story: "Nice attack: Hero stopped killer's rampage by leaping into lorry and wrestling with him
    A man slowed the murderous rampage of a man driving a truck through a crowd in Nice by jumping into the cab and seizing his revolver. The attacker, 31-year-old Mohame…" How can this be possibly be reconciled with the videoed alleged final police shoot-out moments here?

  5. From:
    "For the first couple of hours, the official death count was “at least 77.” (Then they upped it to “over 80” and then to “84” which is 77+7.) It happened on 7/14 (fourteen being two sevens, so 7/14 = 7 /7+7 = 777). 77 is a multiple of 11, and 777 is a multiple of 111. So once again, it’s an all-too-obvious case of illuminati numerology."



    "Nice attack: City refuses police call to delete CCTV images"

  9. See:

  10. Everything by numbers?


  12. Must-see: Published on 2 Feb 2015
    Questions the US relationship with Israel, Zionism, and Israel's involvement with the 9/11 attacks, introduces the concept of Greater Israel... "The terrorist took over Israel in 1977. That's when 9/11 was hatched."

  13. I really don't see how anyone can cast any conspiracy voodoo over this tragedy. The guy was off his meds and messed up. he hired a big truck. The security was lax - no surprise - it took a while to figure out what was going on and for rozzer to shoot the truck up. They were crappy shooters and hit the left side of the windscreen (as observer would look at it) or he was leaning to one side. The witnesses - well it's common practice to take eye-witness accounts with a pinch of salt. In other words - it went down as told in the media. And the numeroliogy thing - please - any reference to that by anyone and your cred and kudos evaporate. Crazy individuals do crazy things in crazy ties. Deal with it and stop sounding like a stoner dreaming up bullshit plots.

  14. ties?? I meant 'times' of course

  15. From:
    "A senior French police officer has claimed that the interior ministry “harassed” her into altering a security report from the deadly terrorist attack in Nice.

    Sandra Bertin, the officer in charge of Nice's CCTV control room, told the Journal du Dimanche newspaper on Sunday that an unnamed interior ministry official contacted her after the attack and pressured her into altering her report for the night of the incident.

    On July 14, a truck driver plowed through a Bastille Day crowd in Nice, killing 84 people and wounding 200 others.

    Bertin claims that she was "harassed for an hour" by the official who wanted her to detail the presence of local and national police at the fireworks event where the carnage took place."


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.