Published On: Sat, Aug 10th, 2019

El Paso, and why American mass shootings don’t have to be remotely believable

Another day, another American mass shooting – that was quickly exploited by politicians and corporate-media to attempt to shame the gun-owning public into accepting their disarmament. While the El Paso incident of 3rd August was in many ways what one has come to expect of a false flag attack (let us not beat about the bush), there is a little difference about it in that, as far as the full political agenda goes, it presents the development of the American white-supremacist, linked with the ascendency of Trump, from being a nascent terrorist into an actual one. As in Britain, and as explained hereabouts in the FBEL National Action series, the bull [‘s eye] in the middle of the target are people who are a threat to the “rules based order” – the Anglo-globalist New World Order – because of their peaceful, lawful opposition. To shoot at this real enemy in a raw fashion would merely illustrate the flaming totalitarianism of Government, because stigmatisation and demonisation of what is eminently and logically reasonable is just not possible. Therefore, to activate an ability to aim at and hit this real threat, layers of fictional menace are wrapped around the central zone. All the arrows that are delivered in the name of striking these outer regions actually land in the middle.

Although the attempts in the UK to marginalise and criminalise a whole swathe of people, and therefore besmirch the image of Brexit, through the “Tommy Robinson” and National Action psyops have failed miserably, it is possible that the El Paso incident could also represent the opening of another front. Brexit is the leading edge of domestic opposition to the Anglo-globalist order, and Trump himself has linked his name to it so as to present himself as a leader of an American version. In truth, Trump is not an anti-globalist. He has merely reconnected more determinedly the interests of the American elite with Anglo-globalism. In other words, he has recommitted American resources for the purpose of Anglo-globalist unipolarity, and sold it as “America First”. It means America first in the Anglo-globalist empire, and definitely not all of America either.

It is quite possible that there is even less awareness of the real nature of Anglo-globalist government in the US than there is in the UK – even when an incident like El Paso at last awakens an appreciation that such events are engineered purposely to create a scapegoat, or to heap more odium upon one already extant. Some contributors to the Breitbart comments sections under stories about El Paso have been calling it a false flag, but one that has somehow been executed by the Democrat party, and perhaps in conjunction with something called the “deep state”, in order to malign Trump. The truth is that the deep state does not exist. Instead, military intelligence sits higher in the hierarchy than civilian government and pulls the strings.

As the FBEL reader will know, the extraordinarily ridiculous QAnon internet phenomenon (written of in any detail for the first time in these pages here) is largely responsible for maintaining the illusion that Trump is a totem for American sovereignty against submission to and being subsumed into One World Government. In this impossible framework, when Trump looks to serve that which he is supposed to be opposed to, it is rationalised as manoeuvres to outwit the non-existent deep state. On the other hand, what arises out of this as an actual fact is a large amount of people who have become cultists whose leader cannot do any wrong, and feel that he and they are persecuted when there are allegations to that effect. In other words, there is a conspiracy against them. Unfortunately, the very foundation of the belief system is unsound because it is based on a fabrication: Trump isn’t in opposition to the enemy. Be that as it may, it will have led a great deal of people into a vulnerable position, with the traps now being set to collect them. The reader may well be aware of news of a “FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office”, that identifies “conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists” as a threat to American national security.

The document specifically mentions QAnon, a shadowy network that believes in a deep state conspiracy against President Trump, and Pizzagate, the theory that a pedophile ring including Clinton associates was being run out of the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant (which didn’t actually have a basement).

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states.

The information from the FBI may in itself be a psyop to encourage further feelings of persecution in those who have invested in what they think is a righteous battle to MAGA, but which is, nevertheless, a complete illusion to provoke redirected behaviour and misspending of their resources. At any rate, the right-minded amongst us won’t need FBI memos to understand that QAnon – and the alternative media that has promoted it – has always been about manipulating morons into political postures so that there is an enabling in a wider public to give credence to that fabricated larger-target mentioned above. Moreover, if QAnon can be used as shorthand for “nutbar” in efforts to debunk conspiracy theories, then there is no way that it will be rolled up, and no shortage of effort to have people subscribe to it or, indeed, a host of alternative media that exists to mislead.†

QAnon’s usefulness in this respect was of great assistance to PolitiFact as it tried to deal with the problem of two photographs, showing two different people, that had been released to the public purporting to bear the image of the El Paso shooting suspect, Patrick Crusius. To be clear, the people in each photograph do appear to be different individuals. That one has darker skin may be meaningless except it might tend to make him appear to be of a Latin origin – which may be significant in terms of unpicking the official narrative because Crusius (which is not an English name by any stretch of the imagination) is supposed to have targeted Mexicans. However, the individual with the olive complexion (more likely thanks to genetics, rather than tanning) and perhaps a capacity to grow a fuller head of hair (not to mention a beard of sorts), also – and rather crucially – has a wider head than his paler (and thinner-haired) counterpart.

The obvious difference between these two individuals was picked up on by the publisher or user of the “Qanon NC” Facebook page. To be more precise, it was noticed that within the space of four hours (as the image below shows) the New York Post had produced two articles naming Patrick Crusius as the shooting suspect, accompanied each time with an image showing the different Patrcik Crusius. PolitiFact reported that the Facebook post in question made the claim that “They just CHANGED the identity of the El Paso shooter and nobody freaking noticed”. Of course, this is a sitting duck for a debunking effort. Firstly, this Facebook user appears not to have anything approaching a fundamental understanding of State crime, nor indeed any clue about the identity of its perpetrators [the clue is in the name] – and this is not to be surprised at given the identification with QAnon. And when such weaknesses are instilled by alternative media acting in bad faith, then it is easy for the likes of PolitiFact to come along and exploit them.

Who is the “they” that has supposed to have changed Crusius’ identity? PolitiFact is actually blameless in assuming that the reference is to the New York Post – or the media – because the complaint appears to be about the presentation of the suspect in the media. Of course, the proposal gives far too much power to something that is usually just an outlet for propaganda or misdirection, handed to it to be passed on to an audience, and that is not a decision maker in the execution of false flags. PolitiFact doesn’t mention any of this, of course, and argues beside the point that because the New York Post consistently names Patrick Crusius, it did not change anyone’s identity. As for the different image, which is the point, the explanation offered is actually not a fact, but a theory of PolitiFact’s own: “It’s likely the photo that media outlets initially published was out-of-date”.

Having reached out to the New York Post to ask about the change of image, and the El Paso Police Department to ask for confirmation that the paler individual is also Crusius, PolitiFact promised to update its exercise in debunking if there was any response. This was on Monday, August 5th, and needless to say, the article in question has not offered any new information. Naturally, this would be because the New York Post and the El Paso Police would not have any comment to make on a situation that the two images suggests, which is one of two potential patsies.

Starting with the premise that such an operation as El Paso would likely involve any number of operatives on scene to take the fall, it is then reasonable to believe that a decision as to who to blame for the caper happened in real time to best suit any number of variables that we are just not privy to. From imagery of a suspect captured at the scene, it appears that the darker skinned Patrick Crusius got the job in the end. However, it appears that details were released of the other version – the fault of a breakdown in communication, perhaps. An alternative theory is that this other person may well have been lined up to be the fall guy for another event‡ – again, some incompetence, or even sabotage, meant that it had to be abandoned, and perhaps the release of the wrong identity was part and parcel of the foiling ineptitude.

In any case, in the end, PolitiFact debunked a strawman, and didn’t really do that either. But this didn’t matter. Because PolitiFact had pitted itself against a decoy in QAnon, what actually resulted was an exercise in conditioning audience based on the reputation of the source of the claim. After all, the PolitiFact article essentially opened with denouncement of QAnon as “a broad conspiracy theory popular among supporters of President Donald Trump”.

And actually, this treatment of appealing to a negative emotional response in order to organise thoughts along the lines of political factions points us to the essential thing that resides at the crux of all that has here been written of: keeping people in two camps hostile to each other. As it happens, the author now thinks that American mass shooting incidents are not about creating favourable conditions for legislating gun control, but instead are about exacerbating political hostility – which is something that is always achieved by such an incident. Indeed, the American Government has no need for gun control – Americans have been living in a tyranny for a good many years, and gun ownership has made no difference to its coming on. Moreover, according to the contributions in the Breitbart comments sections, there may well be a prevailing mentality whereby gun control, if it was ever fully implemented, would precipitate the hiding of weapons so that they were out of reach of the clutches of the seizing authorities, but nevertheless rendered unusable for self-defence from common crime – unless one would make an automatic criminal of oneself. Caches of hidden weapons could only be used for one purpose, but being hidden, and not to hand, they have already caused their owners to be at a tactical disadvantage. No, the American Government cannot be overly concerned about having to take weapons away from Americans, and most likely does not lie when it tells the public it is not coming for the guns. The appearance of wanting to deny the right to bear arms, with the two-part political spectrum loaded accordingly for and against, is many times more effective for purpose of control than actually wanting it for real – and mass shooting false-flags are now indispensible for creating the appearances. Evidently, they don’t even have to be remotely believable, or sustainable in terms of a credible and coherent narrative.


† The author found a podcast featuring a conversation between Fetzer (of getting-himself-sued-because-of-a-book-on-Sandy-Hook fame) and some female individual discussing the El Paso shooting. Their assumption that it was a hoax, and that there were no victims, caused a necessity in their scheme for witnesses to be crisis actors. When these charlatans air the opinion that a witness to the incident, who said she saw three or four shooters, was in fact lying because of supposed “signalling” with facial features to reveal “the all seeing eye”, what they are doing is creating a tendency in followers to reject real evidence in favour of bonkers lunacy.

‡ Much has been made in some quarters of the internet of a Fox announcer on an El Paso local station who declared another shooting that hadn’t yet happened. The author has not yet verified it, and probably won’t given that it is irrelevant.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.