Dr. Eowyn, How we know New Zealand mosque shooting video is a CGI fake

Dr. Eowyn

On March 14, 2019, New Zealand sustained its deadliest mass shootings in modern history when a lone gunman, 28-year-old Brenton Tarrant, killed 50 people and injured another 50 at Al Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, New Zealand. The media immediately identified Tarrant as that most noxious of all monsters — “an alt-right affiliated white supremacist”. (Wikipedia)

The gunman recorded and streamed on Facebook Live a video of the first attack at Al Noor Mosque, with 4,000 overall views before it was taken down. The video is banned by the New Zealand government because it is deemed “objectionable” — whatever that means. Anyone who possesses or shares the video is threatened with 10-14 years in prison; corporations (such as web hosts) face an additional $200,000 ($137,000 US) fine under the same law.

Even without being asked by the New Zealand government, mainstream U.S.-owned platforms such as FacebookYouTubeTwitter and Scribdeagerly complied with the ban by scrubbing the video and the shooter’s manifesto. YouTube went so far as to intentionally disable search filters so that people cannot find the video or other Christchurch shooting materials.

Websites such as Dissenter, Zero Hedge4chan8chan, and video hosting platform LiveLeak, among others, which hosted footage of the attacks or simply allowed people to engage in uncensored discussion of the shootings, have been partially or completely blocked in both New Zealand and Australia for the sake of “protecting consumers,” according to New Zealand Telecom, the privately-owned telecommunications provider.

In an open letter to FacebookTwitter and GoogleNew Zealand telecom CEOs said the suppression hasn’t gone far enough, and urged that U.S. social media follow European proposals for hyper-vigilant policing of content for the sake of “protecting consumers”. The letter reads (Zero Hedge):

“You may be aware that on the afternoon of Friday 15 March, three of New Zealand’s largest broadband providers, Vodafone NZ, Spark and 2degrees, took the unprecedented step to jointly identify and suspend access to web sites that were hosting video footage taken by the gunman related to the horrific terrorism incident in Christchurch.

As key industry players, we believed this extraordinary step was the right thing to do in such extreme and tragic circumstances. Other New Zealand broadband providers have also taken steps to restrict availability of this content….

We also accept it is impossible as internet service providers to prevent completely access to this material. But hopefully we have made it more difficult for this content to be viewed and shared – reducing the risk our customers may inadvertently be exposed to it and limiting the publicity the gunman was clearly seeking.”

In our time of movies, TV and video games saturated with over-the-top violence, why would the New Zealand government take such extreme measures to prevent its citizens from seeing the video?

The answer perhaps is that if the people of New Zealand actually saw the video, they would realize the mosque shootings were a gigantic false-flag hoax perpetrated on them in order to advance gun control. (The video can still be viewed on BitChute, the file-sharing video hosting service, and alsohere.)

Two FOTM posts have addressed the mosque shooter’s video: “The Christchurch mosque-shooting video banned by New Zealand government” and “The NZ mosque-shooting post that got Tony Mead banned from Facebook, again“.

This post offers four reasons why we can confidently say the mosque shooting video is a CGI (computer generated imagery) fake, using thechroma key compositing (or “green screen”) technique:

(1) When shot, people don’t just fall like inert sacks of potatoes

In an audio interview and on James Fetzer’s blog, Dr. Scott Bennett, former U.S. Army psychological operations officer and State Department counterterrorism contractor, points out that in a real shooting with real bullets, especially when civilians are shot, they would be in a state of hysterical, emotional shock. Panic-stricken, their bodies flooded with adrenalin, they would violently flail, run or crawl away. They do not simply fold up and fall to the ground like sacks of potatoes. 

In the mosque shooter’s live-streamed video, however, the victims immediately fall to the floor like sacks of potatoes, face down (since faces are more of a CGI challenge). Once fallen to the floor, the victims stay still, with nary a moan nor twitch.

It stretches our credulity to claim that the mosque shooter is so skilled that every shot he fired was a kill shot. The fact is that in real life, bullets can bounce, ricochet, and miss the target.

Writing in “What really happens when you get shot,” Wired, Dec. 8, 2015, Connor Narciso, a former Army Green Beret who served in Wardak Province, Afghanistan, with 3rd Special Forces Group, explains:

As a combat medic in Afghanistan, I treated a variety of gunshot wounds. And as the husband of an emergency room provider at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, gun violence has remained—at least peripherally—a significant part of my life….

[E]ven multiple gunshots to the torso won’t guarantee death, or even incapacitation. Arun Nair is an attending physician in the ER at Johns Hopkins, and an International Health Fellow. “Bullets are magic,” Nair tells his students. He recounts the story of a young man in Lebanon who survived after being shot six times.1 He took repeated shots to the chest and throat. One of the six bullets stopped inside his pericardium, the narrow space between the heart and its thin protective membrane. Another bullet ended up in the victim’s esophagus; he swallowed it. Amazingly, the patient was alert and speaking lucidly to the doctors. You can’t assume anything, says Nair.

(2) Shell Casings vanish into thin air

At the 8:56 mark in the video, the gunman is outside the mosque’s front gate and begins shooting down the street. At the 9:06 mark, the gunman turns around and shoots down the street in the other direction.

Curiously, the video shows shell casings being ejected from the semi-automatic, but the casings then disappear into thin air. No shell casings are on the ground because this footage was actually taken not on the street but before a “green screen”, which explains why we see shell casings being ejected but no casing actually falls to the ground.

(3) Bullets hit victims leaving no marks

After shooting up and down the street, ejecting shell casings that vanish into thin air, the gunman returns to his car and exchanges rifles, tossing the one he had used to the ground next to his car, which later also vanishes. He then inexplicably returns to the “crime scene” to shoot again and again at the crumpled bodies in the mosque. Strangely, the “bullets” leave no marks on the victims’ clothes or bodies. Upon impact, we see only a puff of air on the victim’s clothes, which suggests the gun was a toy gun that blasts air instead of solid projectiles.

Yesterday, in an email to James Fetzer, Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today who is, like Fetzer, a U.S. Marines veteran, wrote:

“I generally recognize any part or accessory available worldwide for this type of weapon the common sellers, palmetto state armory, delta team tactical, classic firearms…and nobody has part for real guns that look like the things in the video. mike and i have built thousands of custom AR weapons in every size and caliber this stuff is crap…..and quite possibly toys….What we have in NZ appears to be (real or fake) video of fake guns.”

Indeed, in a comment, Kevin J. Lankford, a reader of FOTM, observed that the shooter’s guns “looked like nothing I could identify,” and that the reason why the guns are painted with white symbols all over is precisely “to disguise the fact they are fake.”

(4) Bullets fired at car windshield leave no marks

After the gunman finally leaves the mosque, he gets back into his car. While driving away, he shoots at the car’s windshield three times. Strangely, the bullets leavet no marks on the windshield — no bullet holes, no smashed glass — as you can see in the GIF below and the pic of his arrest by police.

Go here to watch a video demonstrating the fakery of the mosque shooter’s livestream video by juxtaposing it with footage from a video game.

To conclude, the shooter’s livestream video was made with a live man shooting guns, at least one of which is a toy air gun, against a “green screen”. The “green screen” is then filled in with CGI images of the mosque and victims being shot; of the street outside the mosque where the gunman fired shots, ejecting shell casings that vanished into thin air; and of his car, wherein the gunman shot at the car’s windshield, leaving no bullet holes or shattered glass.

All in all, the video was poorly and sloppily made. Wellington should have hired Hollywood professionals to do the job.

H/t Vivian Lee, Harold Saive, and Big Lug.

See also:


Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:

67 thoughts on “Dr. Eowyn, How we know New Zealand mosque shooting video is a CGI fake”

  1. The problem is, people are used to seeing Hollywood special effects which treats the audience to an over the top visual experience. Reality is different…. Especially when seen through a low resolution helmet cam. Is this the windscreen you refer to that shows no signs of damage?


  2. The biggest inconsistency is the magazine under the bulletin board. It is there before he even makes it down the hallway (video at 6:39). At 6.54 he picks it up…the only explanation is it flew off his vest when he turned 90 degrees to fire in another room. He is at least 10 feet from the magazine when it is first viewable…

  3. Willy, using jimstone dot worked for me, his thesis being that the mosque interior is not set-up like a mosque. His conclusion, like others, is that it is computer generated.

    Why is it so shoddy? I hear Hollywood mentioned and I can tell you, you will never get a job in that town if this is your work product. There are hobbyists making better stuff than this.

    That the shoddiness of the video is proof of the fraud is self-evident, but I question Jim Stone’s assumption that that is why the video is banned in NZ. It seems to me that the video was intentionally made badly and deliberately distributed. Thus, the proof was provided. The real question is why.

    The banning of the video did create the occasion for a full-throated call for censorship with many people avoiding the video because they were convinced of the gore, or the burden viewing it would put on the ‘survivors’, that word again; all their outrage is obviously misplaced and part of the psyop.

    Here’s a video that says it may be most zealously suppressed in NZ because the license plate of a car was inadvertently revealed in an exterior shot:

    Go to youtube and in the search paste _TSum0TG75M
    It’s called, What They Dont Want You to See in The NZ Mosque Shooting Video – And Its Not “CGI”

    The uploader claims to work in feature film production and believes the incident happened as reported. He sees blood, brains and bullet casings all over the place, and no indication of ‘pre-planning.’ He says, “The claims of CGI are the false narrative to cover up the real black op.” Does this mean it’s not a black op if it uses cgi? I don’t get his reasoning but I’d like to know to know who belongs to that license plate at 4:40. Maybe it’ll finger someone interesting, if it ever pans out.

    1. Could be I mis-understood what Stone said, but I believe htated the set was constructed. There was CGI involved because it goes from a real outside to a constructed inside. Did you catch the part about the socks…to me, that is a clincher.
      So, Crowhouse is Max Igan…the next vid up is the one that last I looked is still under moderation here. He claims the shooting is real and did not involve CGI. Calls anyone claiming CGI is lying. That tone of accusation gives me pause. I find that very hard to swallow. I’m very careful with Igan, as he comes across far too intelligent and the many vids he posts are of Hollyweird quality. As with Stone, I take him with a grain of salt….same as I do with Benjamin Fulford.
      The people in red, the red cone and the red car are obviously handlers and signals. BUT, that does not negate that CGi was present. Why would it?
      The caliber of the bullets does not mean blood would not be all over the place…especially at that range AND the number of rounds fired.
      All this because they do not want that car identified? Much too obvious and easy…one look from someone who knows how to trace a plate in NZ and game over. Vety easy her….NZ may be quite different, but considering how this vid has already gone viral, someone has or will identify it.
      For me, it just does not add up.
      As you have said, the most perplexing puzzle is WHY so damn shoddy. It had to be made purposefully bad.

      Hubris, arrogance…in our face….I just do not know.

      1. Yes, that’s what I got from Stone as well. Not contesting his observations just his assumption that the shooter video was buried because it shoddy.

        So crowhouse is max igan. I agree with you that his insistence is a red flag. The emphasis on the plate is interesting because it apparently has not been traced to an owner yet, at least as far as crowhouse is telling. This means the license plate is either a distraction, or will point to an innocent, an implicated party, or a target of this same psyop.

      2. This is what vexes me….In the US, tracing a plate is a snap. What’s taking them so long…?
        This may be nothing, but without going back to check the details, was there not a red car by the entrance…..the plate being identified was on a gray car, no? Or is color blindness setting in?…damn, this getting younger is a pain.
        “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now”…RZ…

      3. In case you do not follow Matt (Quantum of Conscience), check his latest vid in which he is quite disappointed with Igan…as am I

        “Oh No! Another Graduated Animal Farm?” YT

      4. Such a cool song! and so perfect if you’re trying leave behind using ideas as your maps:

        Half-wracked prejudice leaped forth
        \”Rip down all hate,\” I screamed
        Lies that life is black and white
        Spoke from my skull. I dreamed
        Romantic facts of musketeers…

        Fearing not that I\’d become my enemy
        In the instant that I preach…

        \”Equality,\” I spoke the word
        As if a wedding vow
        Ah, but I was so much older then
        I\’m younger than that now

        Did you ever hear this song from the 30th Anniversay recording? Check it out:

        Bob Dylan – My Back Pages (From the 30th Anniversary Concert)
        Youtube — rGEIMCWob3U

      5. This will scare you. First time I saw Bob was in 1962 at a concert he did for CORE in Syracuse….a wooden stool, harmonica holder and a glass of a water…that was it on the stage.
        I last saw him in Orlando this past November….6 rows back center orchestra….blew me away as always….only plays the piano and sings now…never touched the geetar! 77 and still rockin\’
        I even treated myself to a glass of his Heavens Door bourbon pre-concert.
        When I told some folks the first time I had seen him was 56 years ago, it opened up many conversations.
        I love all his songs…but crazily enough, I think Brownsville Girl is the most under-rated and least played of all his songs.
        We could talk for years, eh?

      6. “Well, there was this movie I seen one time…”

        That song is a movie.

        Yeah, we could talk for years about that guy. I think we’re on the same track. It sounds corny I know, but it’s like I’m grateful that my life coincided with his. I think we’re lucky to have him as our contemporaneous artist.

        “All I remember about it was it starred Gregory Peck, he wore a gun
        and he was shot in the back
        Seems like a long time ago, long before the stars were torn down”

        Bob Dylan – Brownsville Girl
        On Vimeo rGEIMCWob3U

      7. I always thought the same…wonderful visuals.
        Simple Twist of Fate”…the same…
        I know of no one who influenced my thought pattern more than Dylan.
        I’m sure you’ve seen “I’m Not There”….
        BUT, I never understood his son Jessie (named one of my children after him), as a member of the CFR. That opens up another book.

      8. From fantastic analysis to reminiscences about Bob Dylan?
        How happy can I be to be able to comment again.
        Willy and Toni, I feel like we’re sitting around a coffee table.
        Jim needs to have you both on one of his radio shows. You down, maybe?
        Sigh….. Thank you.

      9. Dylan takes me back to a time we had hope. He tapped into the general consciousness and expressed in words and music the way we thought and felt at that time….and even now. Untouched by trends, he’s been true to his Muse and his followers all these years. Arguably, Bob has been the most influential performer and changed music and the English language more than anyone else in our time.
        Thanks Bob…..I look forward to seeing you in Orlando again come November…
        Rock on!

        While riding on a train goin’ west
        I fell asleep for to take my rest
        I dreamed a dream that made me sad
        Concerning myself and the first few friends I had

        With half-damp eyes I stared to the room
        Where my friends and I spent many an afternoon
        Where we together weathered many a storm
        Laughin’ and singin’ till the early hours of the morn

        By the old wooden stove our hats was hung
        Our words were told, our songs were sung
        Where we longed for nothin’ and were satisfied
        Jokin’ and talkin’ about the world outside

        With hungry hearts through the heat and cold
        We never much thought we could get very old
        We thought we could sit forever in fun
        And our chances really was a million to one

        As easy it was to tell black from white
        It was all that easy to tell wrong from right
        And our choices there was few so the thought never hit
        At the one road we traveled we ever shatter or split

        How many a year has passed and gone
        Many a gamble has been lost and won
        And many a road taken by many a first friend
        And each one I’ve never seen again

        I wish, I wish, I wish in vain
        That we could sit simply in that room again
        Ten thousand dollars at the drop of a hat
        I’d give it all gladly if our lives could be like that

      10. Nice post, Willy. Well said.

        Many people say that Bob Dylan made a pact with the devil, and point to his 60Minutes interview in 2004 as proof:

        Q) Why do you do it? Why are you still out here?

        A) Well, it goes back to the destiny thing. I made a bargain with it, you know, a long time ago and I’m holding up my end.

        Q) What was your bargain?

        A) To get where, uh, I am now.

        Q) Should I ask who you made the bargain with?

        A) With, with, you know, the Chief Commander.

        Q) On this earth?

        A) On this earth, and in the world we can’t see.

        Some people will contend that the Chief Commander is Satan, even though earlier in the interview Dylan says, “God’s the judge. The only person you have to think about lying twice to is either yourself or to God.”

        The belief that Dylan is Satanic is part of the McGowan-style conspiracy that music in the sixties was invented and manipulated by deep-state actors to undermine the ethos of the country, and therefore must be rejected.

        But of course that is not the whole story. Like LSD and the internet, what was instigated by government escaped the confines of the controllers to be taken up by the people, and our artists, as creative tools in forging a new consciousness.

      11. Toni…Thanks….
        I lost a good cyber friend over that stuff. He insisted Dylan was not Dylan.
        I have followed the man for 57 years. I know better.
        Watched that interview many times, including when it first aired. That interview in itself was by far the most revealing he ever gave…at least on the box. Bradley did a great job and was highly respectful. I do think Bob was a bit hard on himself…but in a way, I would expect that. He was dancing a beautiful dance with his Muse in those early days and it’s no surprise he hardly remembers writing those songs. Having been in that space, I know what it is to wonder how I could have written some of my own poetry…..that I would hardly attempt today.
        When those early albums came out, I couldn’t wait for the next. When it finally arrived, I would listen in awe and shed many a tear over those magical lyrics.
        When he went electric at the Forest Hills Stadium (the first set was all acoustic and he opened the second with Ballad of a Thin Man), many fans
        were crying.
        I smiled……..knowingly.

      12. I hear ya, Willy. It’s hard to overestimate his impact.

        As a silly example, just look at all the people named Dylan. Nobody was named Dylan before Bob took the name from the poet. Now, people who have never heard of either Dylan name their kid Dylan.

        I didn’t realize you are a poet. I’d read some if you posted it.

      13. Willy, tell me more about the cyber friend you lost because of Dylan. What was his/her argument?

        (Also, wanted to say, I love your Dylan stories.)

      14. Toni ….March 26, 2019 at 6:53 pm
        There’s a channel on YT that he watches ….apologies, I forget the name….but it’s the same guy that says Mcartney of the Beetles is not the original Mcartney etc.

      15. Toni…Here’s something kewl I like to share with Dylan aficionados….
        I assume you have heard “Roll on John” .
        Did you catch the one word whistle blowing?

      16. HI Willy and Tony, in case you didn’t listen, here’s that radio show with Jim where I gave you both a shout out….

        We are working on a calendar and archive right on Jim’s site, and a way for him to be contacted if his comment fans are having trouble posting, like I did for so long.

  4. Welcome to the Go-Pro world of mass shootings. More to come. By doing this they totally control the video agenda – why allow other videos when we have the real authentic LIVE one from the shooter’s helmet?…AND we can sensor ALL videos on this basis of not even allowing the real one to be shown very shortly after the shooting! Very clever.

    1. Barbara…You will find it in just about any of these articles and on Fetzer’s The Real Deal. Not to entice you into watching, but it’s not gruesome at all….and much more poorly made than many Hollyweird movies that are indeed gruesome. I do not participate in video games, but I am told it’s similar to those. From the games I have glimpsed at in someones home, it’s much less violent…no spurting blood etc..

    2. It seems so surreal at first (cause is is!), but when you finally see him walk in to a room with bodies (or wax dummies) piled up at the window face down before he even gets there, you can let yourself release the natural horror that the IDEA of a massacre causes, and let in the anger that knowing they are lying to us again take it’s place. Neither one is a nice emotion though, so I understand your reluctance.

  5. I am not surprised everyone believes. Ever since they shot up that school in Scotland eons ago, people have been slowly conditioned to think this sort of thing is a routine part of the landscape. So when they hear the latest, they just accept that it happened. I don’t. Once you watch the actual videos, it’s plain as day this is a simulation. Lack of serious bullet damage, lack of dust, lack of blood, lack of targets outside, lack of response from police considering how close they were, lack of authentic looking guns. Then you have all the boxes checked for enraging people: 1. linked to Trump automatically 2. Manifest conveniently written 3. Slogans painted on gun 4. Muslims targeted in prayer 5. Gotta have more gun control

    1. And don’t forget the immediate and successful clamor by ‘social media users’ to take down the video, and censor the obviously faked evidence that had been deliberately leaked in the first place. Were they collaborators or useful idiots?

      Who are the people who actually believe in these scenarios? It’s like they have no experience in the physical world. Never seen a gun. Never seen an animal be hunted or butchered. Wouldn’t know how to survive the night outside. Have they been carried around in a palanquin their whole lives and never set foot on the ground?

      More likely, you are right; it’s conditioning. They are predisposed by the new norms of public outrage to be blinded to their own reason and physical reality by the ‘horror’ of the show.

    2. Don’t forget his admonition to “Subscribe to Pewdie Pie” right at the very beginning! The fellow has too much communication power.
      Same with Dr. Peterson. Banning his books as if somehow he had something to do with it???
      This one is so bloody fake, if we don’t let up we could crack this system wide open.
      Fellowship is down today, I bet more of that is coming… We need a new blockchain internet.
      Anyone familiar with Inrupt? Is it legit?
      Good to talk to you all again. I had to get a VPN as they blocked my ISP from commenting on this site for over a year.

    1. One wonders what input device Mark used to convey this outburst against keyboards.

      The truth is, if we believed that this event happened as described in the media, we’d be traumatized, too. Assuming he’s not someone’s asset, the fact that Mark is questioning the questioners could be a signal of cognitive dissonance, which is often the first step on the road to changing one’s mind.

      1. Like he typed it with his MIND? Whoa.

        Hit ‘n run… I just don’t get it. I’m always hanging around after, like, “Well, you gonna answer me?” Lol

      2. Hit and run like that other remark a day ago…we’ll never hear from them again.
        Just being facetious re the psychic comment. That entire comment was just silly….even if any of us could travel to NZ…it’s long after the fact (read, “hoax”), eh?

      3. Yeah, Mark doesn’t really make a coherent argument.

        No, I know we use ‘hit ‘n run’ for some of these one-time commenters. I meant I don’t get the motivation behind it. I would never do it, myself, and you don’t seem like the type either. I can’t imagine showing up someplace and dropping some invective and then fleeing the scene. I would stick around.

        Here’s a phrase of yours I’ve been dying to use…
        For keericed sake!

      4. Be careful, now….that expression is copyrighted.

        Most times I will stick around…just love the challenge of a good debate….but, if I sense a shill, I am apt not to waste my time. My friend, Dmitri Khalezov has said you cannot beat those characters…and for the most part, he’s correct. The well paid and experienced have unlimited resources and will often use a helper if they get stuck…

      5. Tony and Willy, In the old days, on Jim’s site, they had paid shills hijack Jim’s fans with hundreds of arguments, filling the comments so much that people became discouraged. They were paid a quarter for their comment and 10 cents for every reply, or something like that. They were rather evil and sophisticated. One, who called himself “Apsterian” was a total psychopath…. actually there were others too…Then he moderated them away, for a while it was cool.
        Now “they” are able to block certain IPS addresses from commenting. I have been unable for a year to do so until I got a VPN. How many other folks out there have told a little too much truth and can’t comment… or their comments show up only to them, not to the comment board.
        FellowShip is down today, I think we can expect whole URL’s to be “removed to protect consumers.” I’m glad her article is reproduced here, and I’m happy to get to talk to other smart and funny Fetzer fans like you.

      6. Purposo Anonymi…I had a similar experience years ago on three sites…ICH, Common Dreams and another with a name that escapes me….kept getting back in with a VPN and then stopped….the struggle was not worth it. It was in the early days of considering nukes were used on 9/11 and mentioning a certain Russian’s name.

      7. Purposo Anonymi,
        Thank you for your kind words.

        I remember Fetzer’s other site and you’re right about the comment section being completely clogged with bad actors. How about Emmanuel Goldstein? It was discouraging; it certainly discouraged me. I never posted there.

        I didn’t realize that your ip could be blocked from a site by a third party, but of course it can. I’m so glad to hear about the vpn working for you and that you are back. A year is long time to be away.

      8. Toni…3/25 11:41 AM…I may be speaking too soon, but it looks like I had a post moderated “away”. It was an opposing view with which I disagreed . Maybe it will show up. Beats me. It was from Max Igan whom I see as a dis-info agent….(The Christchurch Massacre – An Independent Analysis). He claimed there was no CGI and that the deaths were real. Just thought those views should also be posted….agreed with or not.

      9. Willy, did you post a link in it? That’ll do it. Weird thing is, it used to say something like, “This comment is in moderation.” Now comments just disappear without warning and you’re left at the top of the page. I guess they go to moderation, I don’t know. That’s why it’s best to copy your comment before it disappears. At least you won’t lose it.

        Yeah, I agree with you that all sides should be open to debate, but then perhaps you grant too much intelligence and perceptivity to the readers here that they will come to right conclusion. Then you end up ALWAYS reiterating what ought to be obvious.

        Just kidding.

      10. Toni…thanks for the response…Yes, it did have a link, but there was no way around it…’twas a Max Igan video. Maybe it will still show up….But, the title is there….so…
        I have to say this comment system leaves me a bit frustrated….sure needs a notification device…and I have no idea what that takes technically.

        Anywho, just posted another comment with no links and that seems to have disappeared.
        For anyone interested, Jim Stone dot is has some excellent points that absolutely wrap up the falsity of this “op”. has to do with the prayer rug and a victims socks that suddenly re-appear.

        To update his site, remove the URL up to the address and refresh…it’s a weird set-up that he says protects his site.

      11. Willy and Toni, I too just discovered a comment moderated away that insisted the attacks were staged, on the long convoluted “Zionists did it all” article. ….which acted as if they were real.
        Who moderates this site?
        There was no link. It is simply gone today.
        I will reach out to Jim and share his answers.

      12. Toni! You’ve been around enough to remember Emmanuel Goldstein?
        That was a character! Those of us working with Jim at the time tried to dissuade him of his belief that Goldstein was Judy Wood in disguise. I believe that Goldstein was a psy op plant who worked Jim and wanted him to think that Judy Wood would waste the hundreds of hours that “commenter” must have spent filling Jim’s comment sections with hate and argument. I know Jim’s moderator at the time spent hundreds of hours getting rid of him and Apsterian and a few others. Now we have this new method. I’m going to find out who moderated my comment off the Kevin Barrett/ Achmed whoever post. It may not have even been Jim. I worked hard to be able to get back in to this section and talk to some real Fetzer friends. Long term now I see.

      13. Purposo,
        Yes, I remember that, but I didn’t know people were trying to dissuade him from the theory!
        What a mess. Yes, this is much calmer, despite moderating issues. These appear slight considering the past, but perhaps some light can be shed on it.
        Good to see you here.

  6. The PM of NZ has her knickers in a wad.

    I can show her a lovely Colt AK 15 all done up in pink, the ”Hello Kitty” version. Its a ladies weapon and does the exact same thing a scary black AK 15 does…..she’ll love it. She’s a total drongo.

      1. THAT is scary.
        Is it not inconceivable there is a movement (spearheaded by ‘Michael’) to place these creatures in prominent positions?

      1. A false flag is a real event that is disguised by the enemy as due to the other. A “hoax” is an event that never happened except on a computer or a staged media platform.

        911 — false flag (most of it)
        Oklahoma City — false flag
        Sandy Hook — hoax
        NZ — ???

Leave a Reply