Monday, 13 June 2016

Orlando Massacre: a very BIG problem!
Big holes in the story! (IF YOU LIKE, please pass on. The world needs to know.)

FBI agents investigate near the damaged rear wall of the Pulse Nightclub where Omar Mateen allegedly killed at least 50 people
FBI agents inspect the damaged wall at the 'Pulse' Nightclub where it is reported fifty (including the gunman) died.
Let's get straight to the point. Any sensible person in the world by now must treat any claim of a "Muslim-related terrorist event" with the greatest degree of caution, if not scepticism. I have attempted in previous articles to point out the many incontrovertible irreconcilable facts that point to unreliability or even criminal fraud, the only conclusion of which is that dark forces within our own governments are following an evil agenda of fear and recrimination.
Now we have an event in Orlando where it is claimed "at least 50" (now 49) have been shot dead  and another 53 seriously injured. I could discuss the many familiar story lines and treatment that are common with earlier ones and particularly the Bataclan - a policeman 'engaging the gunman' inside the building; that he took 'hostages'; the varying descriptions of the gunfire; how he was shot 'as he exited the building'; claims that he was a member of 'ISIS' and a radical Muslim; how he was well known to the police and FBI yet allowed to buy guns; suspicious recorded interviews and pictures of injured people being carried away; 'product placement' in these; 'heroic' police action saving lives; huge media coverage and political grandstanding in the context of elections. 

Omar Mateen
In this case the emotive case of gay rights has been suspiciously tapped into and exploited with the now familiar expressions of 'solidarity' and visual 'rainbow' displays. Even the Radio 3 'Breakfast' programme joined in before 9 am with the playing of 'Over the Rainbow' in memory of the event! I hope the people of the world are not stupid enough to fall into this trap of mass psychological conditioning and manipulation but I fear they will be.
However leaving all these aside and not engaging with the thorny issue of how many were actually killed, by whom and why, yet again I was struck by some completely inexplicable features of the event that cannot be dismissed or argued away and which clearly point to pre-planning and fraud on the part of whoever organised and carried out the event. Please note I am not saying that people may not have died. I am saying that not only can the official version not be trusted, it is quite impossible that it happened in the way described.
I was immediately struck by the speed with which the list of the victims (and in many cases their photographs) were put out by the Orlando authorities. Yet again TIMING is an essence in determining whether this was a wholly genuine or contrived event. 

As you can see below, despite reports in the Guardian newspaper that ten (10) deceased people had been identified by before 06.04 London time (01.04 local time) (Orlando is five hours behind London time) (see below) by 7.33 London time (2.33 Orlando time) the City of Orlando had already published a detailed list of twenty three (23) victims. There is also confusion over the repetition of some of the names. (See highlighted below)
This gives rise to concern and questions for several good reasons. 

First this was the middle of the night. Presumably all the city employees except emergency services were away from work so who did the enumerating and checking before putting out the list within literally minutes of the attack. 

Second, Police never issue names of dead and injured until identification has been confirmed and usually until next of kin have been informed. Yet again we see instantaneous information widely published suggesting pre-planning.

Third, we now know - or have been told - that the police did not storm the building until 05.00. So the quite obvious question arises how they knew with some confidence of at least 23 named victims two and half hours before they entered the building, not to mention that as important crime scene it would have been left undisturbed for some hours.

I do not know when precisely the press was reporting "at least 50 killed" but it could not have been done until 5 am at the earliest. I would be prepared to put money on the fact that the media had been briefed according well before this juncture. I expand on this point below and add an even more damning one.
So the TWO clinching timing issues that PROVE the account cannot be relied upon are as follows:
The BBC reports the "attack began about 02.00 local time". Note "the began". In other words, given the description of the sequence of events, the gunman engaged inside by a policeman, taking hostages, the police assault team not entering until 05.00 when it is claimed the assailant was shot dead as he at that point, attempted to leave the building.

So, it would have been physically impossible for a confirmed list of the dead to have been known and published before 02.33 when it was published by a British newspaper.
To emphasise the point, the first named ten victims appeared in the same British newspaper at 06.04 (01.04 local time) so these people were identified and named one hour before the attack was even alleged to have begun! 


(Just one question for now: if the police did not break in until 5.00 am how was the Orlando City able to circulate confirmed names and ages of the dead from 2 am? From this time the total (50 later amended to 49 though strangely if you include the shooter its back to 50!) and many of the individuals are identified BUT note again the incident didn't START until 2 am and access to the premises wasn't gained until 5 am. None of the film footage gives any indication of dead people outside so how can this be explained OTHER THAN the list and its publication was planned in advance? If there are any other explanations, please let me know.)
Now as if this was not enough to prove there is something seriously amiss here we have other unassailable PROOF for which we must again thank the Guardian. (See below) It reports that in Melbourne, Australia, Victoria's 'Equality Commissioner', Ro Allen, leads a minute of silence for the victims of Orlando, and pledges "We will not fight hate with hate." 
This is clearly a publicity stunt put on by the Government there. The only trouble is that it happens at least an hour and a half before the event is said to have started on the other side of the world! 
Melbourne is nine hours ahead of London. London is five hours ahead of Orlando, Florida. Therefore Melbourne is fourteen (14) hours AHEAD of Orlando. Yet the Ro Allen press announcement is date/time stamped 14.35. That is 00.35 Orlando time or a full hour and a half before the attack is alleged to have started let alone finished.
Yet again Melbourne stars in the very questionable dark arts of espionage and all that jazz, whilst leading the popular field of 'gay rights' and 'equality' politics. (Ro Allen was only appointed in the summer of 2015, and here she is already starring in a world tragedy in which Muslims are again targeted for propaganda purposes)
IN SUMMARY AND TO CONCLUDE: the timing of these reports prove conclusively that the events as described cannot be relied upon for integrity and at the very least the event and the people affected must have been agreed and circulated in advance.
BBC REPORT (verbatim)
"A gunman opened fire at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, killing at least 50 people and injuring dozens before being shot dead by police. What do we know about what happened?

"How the incident unfolded

"The attack began at about 02:00 local time (06:00 GMT) on Sunday.
"Pulse, which is one of the biggest nightclubs in Orlando, was holding a Latin-themed event that was nearing its end when a man opened fire. There were more than 300 people inside at the time.
"He had an automatic rifle, so nobody stood a chance," said Jackie Smith, who saw two friends next to her get shot. "I just tried to get out of there."
"At 02:09, the nightclub posted on its Facebook page: "Everyone get out of pulse and keep running."
"The attack began at about 02:00 local time (06:00 GMT) on Sunday. There was an exchange of fire with a police officer working at the club, after which the suspect took hostages.
"At 05:00 a police assault team went into the club after police received text messages and phone calls from some of the hostages. Mateen was killed in an exchange of fire."

Orlando Florida is 5 hours behind us. Therefore the FIRST names of the victims referred to below - actually part of the 23 in the official list at bottom - must have been issued by 01.04  local time AND OBTAINED BEFORE THIS I.E. BEFORE THE EVENT EVEN STARTED!



Names of ten victims released

from the Guardian: 

Five more victims named





  4. The mainstream take (probably repeated by an outlet near you.

  5. Compare and contrast the behaviour, body language and emotional response to apparently witnessing a hundred people either shot dead or wounded here with this at 16:00 in Who would you say appears the more genuine?

  6. As to an inside view of the CIA see:


  8. Excellent and informative work.

    1. Appreciated, John, thanks.

    2. It isn't really excellent work. You also failed to check the date. Tim Veater is trying to work back British Summer Times from a Guardian article started on the 13th June. The attack took place on the 12 June. The journalists even dated the page. All the posting times are from the 13th. The "big problem" is that Tim didn't double check.

      "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier) Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

  9. For overview and parallels with other incidents of similar nature:

  10. Epic fail. Why didn't you check the date in the Guardian link that you posted?

    "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
    Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

    Those British Summer Time dates that you were working with are from the 13th June.

    You didn't even check the date in the "Melbourne memorial for Orlando: Rowena Allen" but simply focused on the time.

    "By vanbadham 13 June 2016, 14:35"

    All you have done is tried to work times from an article posted first posted on the morning of the 13th June. Has it sunk in yet, a full day after the day of the shootings!

    Check the link again and note the date?

    "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
    Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

  11. Thanks for this Tom. I have checked again on the Guardian report which as far as I can see supports and reiterates the main point I made. The report in Britain was early SUNDAY MORNING 12th June, 2016 - i.e. THE SAME DAY AS THE EVENT. Below is today's (16.6.16) up-dated page that I quoted previously, which you will see confirms the first report was 4 days previous, i.e. SUNDAY 12th.
    "4d ago
    What we know

    For those of you waking up to this story, here is a break down of what we know about the Orlando shooting so far.

    A gunman named as Omar Mateen killed 50 people and left 53 others injured, many seriously, in a 2am attack on LGBT nightclub the Pulse, in Orlando, Florida. After an hours-long standoff, police stormed the building, killed the gunman and rescued about 30 hostages.
    The massacre is the worst mass shooting in American history, and like several recent mass shootings was committed by a man with an AR-15 assault rifle.
    Barack Obama declared the attack “an act of terror and an act of hate”.
    Authorities released the first names of victims, after notifying kin.The first fifteen people named were Edward Sotomayor Jr, Stanley Almodovar III, Luis Omar Ocasio-Capo, Juan Ramon Guerrero, Eric Ivan Ortiz-Rivera, Peter O. Gonzalez-Cruz, Luis S. Vielma, Kimberly Morris, Peter O. Gonzalez-Cruz, Luis S. Vielma, Kimberly Morris, Eddie Jamoldroy Justice, 3Darryl Roman Burt II, Deonka Deidra Drayton, Alejandro Barrios Martinez, Anthony Luis Laureanodisla, Jean Carlos Mendez Perez, Franky Jimmy Dejesus Velazquez.
    Mateen was a US citizen from Fort Pierce, Florida. He was known to the FBI and the subject of two investigations into terror links in 2013 and 2014. Those investigations were deemed inconclusive and closed.
    The shooter called 911 before the attack and spoke with an emergency operator in “general to the Islamic State”. While Isis has claimed responsibility for the attack US officials say there’s no immediate evidence linking the militant group to the massacre.
    Mateen bought a long gun and a handgun legally in the last week, a spokesperson for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms said. Questions have been raised over why he was allowed to buy the weapons.
    His ex-wife said Mateen was “obviously disturbed”and that he beat her and held her hostage during their short marriage.
    Survivors and the families of victims recalled horrific stories of how the attack unfolded, and many waited in fear and anticipation to learn whether their loved ones were victims.
    Donald Trump has postponed a rally in New Hampshire on Monday in the wake of the attacks. But he will press ahead with a speech on “the threats facing all Americans.”
    Renewed debate over gun control has started, with Marco Rubio saying firearms legislation would not have prevented the attack.
    Muslim American leaders, LGBT groups, Pope Francis and others condemned the horrific attack, and urged Americans to rally together. The FBI solicited the public for tips to aid the investigation, blood banks asked for donations around the US, and a fundraising campaign for victims’ medical bills raised $416,000. Authorities set up hotlines for information and campaigns for donations.
    A US official told the Guardian the attack may have been a “massive hate crime”. Mateen’s father told NBC News that his son had become enraged by a gay couple kissing. Updated at 7.34 am BST"
    You will see BST (British Summer) Time is used which is FIVE (5) hours ahead of Orlando time. This means that before 2.34 am the names and ages of at least fifteen (15) of dead victims had been confirmed by the Orlando authorities, this despite the fact that no one has suggested there were dead outside the building, and the police did not enter it until 5.00 am!
    If you can provide an explanation for this, I should be happy to hear it.

    1. Tim, You are still confusing yourself and in doing so leading others astray. The "4 days" reference
      is to when the event took place. The date in the html link also reflects the date of when the event took place. The times referenced in that link are from the 13th June.

      Go back to the link and check the date and time under the named of the reporters.

      "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
      Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

      No go to the bottom of that heading posting and note the time "Updated at 7.34am BST"

      You are just confusing yourself as the times are from the 13th as per the

      "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
      Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

      The same goes for the "Melbourne memorial for Orlando: Rowena Allen" reference. You failed to check the
      date "By Vanbadham 13 June 2016, 14:35"

      Why not contact Bonnie Malkin, Alan Yuhas or Kate Lyons?

      Alan Yuhas

      Kate Lyons

      On both accounts you are trying to work back from BST times from the 13th June. It can't be any clearer but you
      have failed to grasp it.

      For further proof go to the link and right click for the page source. Scroll down for the "published time".

      It can't be any clearer! The published time and date for that link is 13th June 2016 at 06:34Z (Z equals Zulu which is an widely used alternative reference to Greenwich Mean Time).

      "published_time" content="2016-06-13T06:34:20.000Z"

  12. As regards your second point, again I stand by my original assessment. Please check for yourself here
    This is the updated version on the 16th June, 2016, but it refers to "Four days ago" i.e. the same morning as the event, Sunday 12th.
    I quite agree the time stamp for the Melbourne statement is "By vanbadham 13 June 2016, 14:35" but you clearly missed my point. This item is EMBEDDED in the SUNDAY MORNING ARTICLE ON THE 12TH JUNE!
    Melbourne, as I correctly stated is nine (9) hours AHEAD of BST (GMT+10) So not only must vanbadham's time/date stamp be wrong but the event described could not have physically occurred after 4.30 pm the SAME day.
    By the same token this translates to 00.30 Orlando time, a total of 14 hrs (5+9) behind. This of course was BEFORE the assault started! My only explanation is that the event described by "vanbadham" was correctly (but not accurately) date stamped for the next day (13.6.16) but was circulated in error to the Guardian (and probably other outlets) one day early on the actual morning of the events. Of course if true, this is not the first time there have been reliable accounts of 'news planting' ahead of time. See:
    A revisit to the details confirms my first assertion correct, though I must admit you had me worried there. (I like everyone else am quite capable of making a mistake)
    Even were I wrong, it would still leave a big question mark over how Orlando was able to issue confirmed lists so quickly, when they did not gain access till 5.0 am, or indeed how they could have completed their autopsy and other investigations so quickly in such a complex and important case of mass murder, to reportedly allow the bodies to be released to the families within two days!

    1. Tim you are still confusing yourself. For further proof go to the link and right click for the page source. Scroll down for the "published time".

      It can't be any clearer! The published time and date for that link is 13th June 2016 at 06:34Z (Z equals Zulu which is an widely used alternative reference to Greenwich Mean Time).

      "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
      Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

      Now can you see where you have confused yourself? It can't be any clearer!

      "published_time" content="2016-06-13T06:34:20.000Z"

  13. Finally... perhaps I should refer you back to YOUR oversight. As you say ""Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
    Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST". NOTE the "EARLIER". The date of the 13th was the updated version of the original on the previous day to which I referred. You surely do not think it would take the on-line Guardian to start reporting on such a massive news story? The confirmatory words that it was Sunday the 12th are "For those of you waking up to this story".

    1. Tim,
      You are still desperately confusing yourself. I get that it is a mindset, but check the page source for the link. It can't be any clearer or straight forward.

      For further proof go to the link and right click for the page source. Scroll down for the "published time".

      It can't be any clearer! The published time and date for that link is 13th June 2016 at 06:34Z (Z equals Zulu which is an widely used alternative reference to Greenwich Mean Time).

      "published_time" content="2016-06-13T06:34:20.000Z"

      That is why you get the following BST time.

      "Bonnie Malkin (now) and Alan Yuhas and Kate Lyons (earlier)
      Monday 13 June 2016 07.34 BST"

  14. And now it looks like I am in very good (or bad depending on your perspective) company here: reporting
    "Google Search Engine Picked-Up ORLANDO ATTACK NEWS STORY 6 Hours BEFORE attack took place!

    Post by Newsroom - Jun 15, 2016 - 17"
    "The Google news search engine picked-up a Chicago Sun-Times Network article about the attack at an Orlando nightclub 6 hours BEFORE the attack took place! The attack occurred around 2:00 AM eastern US time on Sunday, June 12.

    But the Chicago Sun-Times Network has the following story about the attack, dated 06/11/2016, 08:00PM"
    (For full article see above)

    1. Tim,
      Why do you just accept such claims without checking?

      That is obviously the date when the pages for the upcoming events/days news was created. Look shock horror!

      "Cubs rout Braves in series finale


      Click on the "More..." link and note the date.

      "Braves-Reds box score: 7 things to know


      Click on the "More..." link and note the date.

      Will you now be claiming that they are fixing or predicting sporting events? ;)

      What is so hard to accept that in preparation for the next days news that pages are "created" in advance and then updated?

      Check out the page source and check the "create date".

  15. You are very confused about this. On that page guardian page, looking at it today 17th June, the first (newest) post timestamped 07.33 is the one that you claim to be the fraudulent one. This is the latest post and came almost a day after the attack. The earliest post (found by clicking the "oldest" button) was posted at 12:56 pm a day before the 07.33 am post. This would have been at 07.56am in the Orlando and so makes sense.

    I hope that you intend to act with integrity and admit your mistake.

  16. The good news for you is that you are not as far off base as these guys:

    Who (for some inexplicable reason) seem to think that Google timestamps when it indexes every page and then uses that in it's search results page. Google picks up the dates from many sources, but all of them are supplied by the website. If there is a human error in the posting date (as it appears to be on the Chicago-Sun Times article) it will be passed on to Google.

    These guys have had this pointed out to them and responded by pointing out how little they actually know about the subject.

  17. All the British news agencies/newspapers were on this story the SAME morning as the incident was being reported. That was Orlando time plus five hours. For your argument to be correct we would have to believe the Guardian didn't start doing this for a whole day on Monday morning, which is quite ridiculous. If so it would make the opening statement, "For those of you waking up to this story, here is a break down of what we know about the Orlando shooting so far." How can you argue that this would have been said more than 24 hours after the event, by which time the alleged circumstances had been well publicised?

    1. Tim,
      We get that it is a mindset but seriously catch a grip. You are seriously deluding yourself! Yes, The Guardian journalists were reporting on it from the start.

      For example. Did you even follow up the "Kate Lyons (earlier)" reference?

      Now check the page source date and the date when Kate Lyons compiled it? Yes she was reporting on it from the 12th and also on her Twitter account.

      I bet that you will even confuse yourself over the Twitter times from Kate Lyons Twitter account?

      Now follow the links from the following.

      The links are

      "12 June 2016 - Orlando Pulse club attack: gunman identified as police investigate motive - 12 June 2016"

      "Orlando shooting - as it happened - 13 June 2016"

  18. That is the closing comment after almost a day of coverage, it is an update of what had come to light through the brush night.

    The first post being at about 8am Orlando time makes perfect sense of the police went in at 5am.

    There isn't an argument here, the oldest post is a day older than the latest post (which you seem to think is actually the oldest).

    You are reading the page backwards, please hurry up and correct your mistake.

  19. ORLANDO. BAD ACTING? Must watch.

  20. No one shot until gone 5 am!!?

  21. Ole Dammegard on Orlando:


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