I have corrected this report to state it was an in production Ford Expedition, not a prototype Excursion.
HEADLIGHT FLASHERS IN VIDEO PROVE POLICE SUV
While correcting me and saying it was a Ford Expedition and not an Excursion, yet another reader, after watching the video I linked (farther down this page), made the point that in the video the Expedition is not using the hazard lights, it is using headlight flashers that are exclusive to police vehicles. This proves it really was a Police SUV that was used for the "shoot out". I cropped the capture below to include the police lights on the pursuing cars, which prove the camera was not just blowing everything to white - if that was a normal SUV the flashing lights, clearly seen in the linked video SHOULD BE YELLOW. In America, it is illegal to have flashing white lights anywhere on a vehicle, this is designated for law enforcement only.
So I was wrong about the prototype, but this vehicle still could not have possibly been acquired and driven by our patsies.
An avalanche of readers sent a message that it was a 2015 - 2016 Ford Expedition, this inconsistency is explained and cancelled. Not to worry, THE VIDEO CAPTURE PROVES THEY STILL WERE NOT DRIVING IT. And the two SUV's are so similar they have the same seats.
As you can see from the enhanced capture below, THE DRIVERS SEAT IS EMPTY.
HOW I EXTRACTED THE PROOF ABOVE:
THIS VIDEO I captured the SUV as you see it to the left here (it is in the very first part of the video where the SUV is being filmed from the street, where the scenes are changing so fast they are practically flickering) and I then pulled the capture into GIMP. Then with the levels editor I pulled all 3 arrows down to the dark end of the dynamic range with a small space between pointers and then moved the center slider around until it hit the correct range in the capture to show the seat was there, and empty. The levels adjustment, when used this way, expands the dynamic range to make subtle differences you can't see in the image when viewed normally pop out of the murk.
Additionally, I can't for some reason get the audio from that video, but I have watched it in full and it has a lot of helicopter footage which apparently proves our two patsies were shot and killed by police after the police destroyed their car about 5 miles away, and that they were then transferred to the SUV in handcuffs unconscious or dead. That video is a good one, I think it got leaked by an insider who did not agree with what was done. The video proves police helicopters have cameras no one ever dreamed of, and that is something that is no doubt classified. The helicopter footage has to be an unauthorized leak because it proves these helicopters can put anyone on screen full screen from 10 miles away.
Don't be fooled into supporting a war
It is obvious that the Islamic terror meme is being used to get Americans to support a major war in Syria. And Trump is pumping it up as much as he can. In fact, I think Trump might even be getting manipulated into going rabid on the "Islamic terror" meme so the elite can use his popularity to accomplish their war agenda. That makes a pile of sense as far as I see it. Anything that works I guess.
I am doing a little deep digging for what I think is a holy grail of truth in all of this that will prove out multiple conspiracies in one whack but won't say what that is right now to prevent censors from blowing it.
I will say this: I find it curious that during the video of police "apprehending the suspects" there is NOT ONE SECOND OF ACTUAL FOOTAGE OF SHOTS FIRED FROM THE SUV. It just goes from perfect SUV to shot to pieces SUV in one frame. This was obviously done because no one ever fired anything from that SUV.
I went through a fair amount of footage of the SUV going down the road (everything I can find) using levels to try to extract as much sub detail as possible from the windows and it really looks like both the passenger seat and drivers seat are empty, and that the SUV is being driven via remote. The emergency flashers were on, which is super odd in a police chase but would not be odd if it was being driven via remote for a drill, and there was street radar which showed the SUV was only going 40 MPH while the police were chasing it which is double odd. At that point in all videos, the windows are rolled up and not shot out. So at that point in all videos, the police cannot say they were receiving fire from that vehicle.
All the video is super poor quality, but I can extract sub detail down to one step in 16.7 million with Gimp moved sliders for hours on multiple frames (sliders that let you go up and down in the sub bits you can't see when the video is normally playing) and after extracting every possible ounce of detail I saw no evidence of anyone in those seats. I believe that either the videos are all CGI or that vehicle was driven via remote. At some point I should have pulled a discernible driver out of the murk from at least one frame out of many, and there is NADA.
Any frames that might have given enough detail to see clearly what was going on were miraculously missing from ALL videos, leaving only murky frames to work with even though all the before and after frames are there. Let me explain what I am talking about: (umm later, I got distracted by the fact this SUV does not even exist yet, I think that is more important. I will see if I can get a good extraction and post it later. UUMM, QUESTION: DID FORD PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH A SPECIAL REMOTE CONTROLLABLE SUV THAT IS STILL IN PROTOTYPING STAGE? they would not have to be evil to do that, or complicit in this event to do that, AND IF THEY DID, IT WOULD BE EASIEST TO JUST STRAP IT ON THE CURRENT SOON TO BE RELEASED MODEL, RIGHT? IF IT IS A PROTOTYPE, YOU HAVE A FEW OF THOSE YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SELL TO NORMAL CUSTOMERS ANYWAY, RIGHT? DING DING DING DING DING!!!
Dec 6/7 2015
Gun grab speech today UPDATE: I GUESS NOT. I don't know what that was!
Anyway, he mentioned the anniversary of Pearl Harbor. Ok. So let's see when the next "terror attack" is. Maybe the AI program told his controllers he had better play it cool because too many people knew that shooting was B.S. no matter how forcefully they keep venting the Emu, Ferret and Camel dung through Drudge.
Delay the following for another up and coming day, they will try the gun ban later I guess:
I'd like people to consider something: We are on the cusp of war with Russia. What nation would want a gun ban in America right before such a war? RUSSIA. I have NEVER trusted Russia. And even if Russia is not the problem anymore, people ought to clearly see at least that it is the cold war cronies of Russia that are in control of the American government now, and even if Russia is not the bad guy now, the fact these cronies in our government want a gun grab right before what looks like it could be a world war means ONE THING: They want America to lose that war. CONSIDER THIS DURING OBAMA'S SPEECH: A gun grab now? ARE YOU KIDDING? Who would want that, other than the enemy?
I posted the following to the comment section of a popular news site, and it is a great summary of what is in the report below:
There are a number of problems with the so-called terror attack.
1. The shooter was posting to Facebook during the attack (time records show he could not have done this, so if the shooting happened at all, it was staged by someone else.)
2. When you look at the scenes where the SUV is shot up, they prove the story presented about how it happened to be a lie. Yes, there is a shot up SUV, but all the windows are rolled up, and if active shooters really were threatening police and shooting them from this SUV the windows had to have been rolled down because you can't point a large gun from a space as small as an SUV unless you point it out an OPEN window. The fact the windows are rolled up and shot out in all photos proves no one fired anything from that vehicle and ALL bullets came from police.
3. There is a lawyer working the case for the shooter's family, and he has revealed that both the man and woman were found handcuffed and shot to death in the back of the SUV, which means the SUV had to have been being driven via remote control for the media cameras because you can't drive while handcuffed, shot to death, and stuffed behind the back seat. All of America's cars are now by law at least partially drive by wire and ALL are completely hooked up to the cell phone system at ALL TIMES by Federal law (all models made since 2004,) which makes remote takeover possible. Obviously this is what happened in this case, because dead men can't drive.
There are many many many other huge inconsistencies which proves the shooting was done to make Muslims look horrible and provide an excuse to control the American people, and our Islamic patsy was probably chosen for this because he was a state tax auditor up until a very short time before this happened, (and was transferred to another job for the state) most likely because he uncovered criminal activity. I think someone wanted to get rid of him, and that (along with the fact that he was Muslim) is why he was chosen.
Dec 5 2015
LITMUS TEST TIME.
Read your words about the California FF and how the 'alternative media' is simply aping the msm script - quite true. The available sources of real news are getting so slender as to be near extinction. I want, therefore to do everything in my power to aid your cause, but it seems like jimstonefreelance is a real hot potato! On Thursday I cited that url on a western board I was accustomed to using, as an alternative place for readers to go for a real deal look at what's going on. Within 6 hours of so doing, the post was scrubbed, my avatar blocked, and a full scale assault of slander and lies placed in its stead! Unreal. The credibility of all these gatekeeper western "alternative media" sites is unwinding faster than a kite in the wind!
My response: Here is your litmus test. Take all of the sites that are parroting the MSM script and throw them straight in the trash, no matter how good they looked in the past. Take all alternative web sites that are playing people's ignorance, saying no one in the family knew what the female shooter looked like because her head was always covered (as well as other things) and throw them straight in the trash. Take any alt media site that is hopping on the "it was real this time" meme and throw it in the trash.
At least a few people know that countless fake truth sites were set up in the past decade, feeding good info for years, only to gain people's trust so they could be used as weapons at a time like this. If they are parroting the MSM script this time it does not make them right just because they gave good info in the past, it just exposes them as the fake opposition. There are a few good sites out there, but they are like trying to find strawberries in a patch full of aphids. PICK YOUR SIDES NOW, EVERYONE HAS THEIR PANTS DOWN AND IT IS LITMUS TEST TIME.
Pallas cat wrote:
My response: Ouch, that is a painful one for the fakers, you are absolutely right. The fact this was spelled wrong on an ID card speaks volumes. That would never happen and also proves this girl did not have that card made. It has to be a dropped in fake, and the spelling error in the word "REVENUE" on the same card is a similar bonus.
Someone does not get it!
What do you mean to prove by showing different set of black cars, different types, at different positions, at different place and in different year season?!
Note the sunlight - the sunlit scene is from summer, not from winter... (the horizontal view on FBI sunlit city scene is just a completely different one from the aerial view - someone sent you a bad image?!)
My response: Nope. No misplaced images here . . . . All are still being shown in the same video sequence from the MSM and are still being presented as the same scene. I have re-confirmed this many times and even shot a video of the latest Mexican newscast, to prove the same error is being broadcast even here. They screwed this so seriously it looks like they are testing to see if the flu shots wrecked everyone's brain badly enough for the general population to accept it as one scene!
If you think it is my mistake, it is only because you can't accept that the lies are that provable and that this is not all real. It is a major comedy type screw up.
To see what this guy is referencing, click here
Enough facts are in to paint a very clear picture now
The lawyer that got assigned to this case ended up being a huge problem for the false flag crew because he ended up being a good guy. And he spilled a key piece of evidence on national television - that both shooters were found behind the back seat of the SUV shot to pieces and already in handcuffs. So this opens a huge can of worms that blows a lot of secrets, the story HAS TO go like this now:
The couple was hunted down as they were out and about together, murdered, and stuffed in the back of the SUV behind the rear seat. Subsequently (and there is no other way this could happen) the SUV, which was completely modern and full drive by wire, was then remote control driven "Hastings style" and the police shot it full of holes until a bullet cut a wire somewhere and it stopped. The police reported the couple was in full combat gear, but in reality the wife (who was the only one shown after the police shot up the SUV) was in shorts, high heels, and a short bare tummy blouse.
So the story about combat gear is a lie, and because the couple were already handcuffed, the story about "brandishing weapons and shooting at police" was also a lie, which is subsequently proven by the fact that the windows were rolled up when shot out.
Shooters' family attorney: Everyone is clueless
San Bernardino Attack Eye-Witness: "Three Tall White Men Did It"
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/06/2015 22:35
A few interesting details have surfaced regarding Wednesday's mass shooting dubbed 'terror attack' which killed 14 and injured 17 others. One of the most interesting comes from an eyewitness.
We now know that ATF investigators recovered police issued firearms from the alleged shooters. This key detail was leaked by 2016 GOP Presidential Candidate Carly Fiorina during a press interview after she had overheard a newsroom report that doesn't fit the official narrative.
We also know that active shooter drills actually took place near the crime scene just days before and possibly even on the same day of the mass shooting as reported by Mac Slavo.
Additionally details from an eyewitness, who came forth on the day of the shooting, may have been overlooked by investigators and suggest that there were actually 'three white shooters' instead of the radicalized husband and wife natural-born killer team portrayed in some mainline reports.
The witness, Sally Abdelmageed, worked at Inland Medical Center where the attack took place and saw it all unfold firsthand. It’s also important to note that Abdelmageed is likely not lying and that this quite possibly might be the most accurate eyewitness account publicized to date. After all how can two shooters, a man and a petite woman, be mistaken for three white military men with athletic builds?
In a phone interview with CBS Abdelmageed explained:
"I heard shots fired and it was from you know an automatic weapon. [...] very unusual. Why would we hear shots? As we looked out the window a second set of shots goes off [...] and we saw a man fall to the floor. Then we just looked and we saw three men dressed in all black, military attire, with vests on they were holding assault rifles. As soon as they opened up the doors to building three [...] one of them [...] started to shoot into the room."When asked what the gunman that shot into the room looked like the eyewitness replied:
"I couldn't see a face, he had a black hat on […] black cargo pants, the kind with the big puffy pockets on the side [...] long sleeve shirt [...] gloves [...] huge assault rifle [...] six magazines […] I just saw three dressed exactly the same"."You are certain you saw three men," the newscaster asked Abdelmageed.
"Yes," said Abdelmageed.
"It looked like their skin color was white. They look like they were athletic build and they appeared to be tall."In a shill-like manner the CBS reporter responded, "And of course we just learned that one suspect was a woman."
To boot it also appears as if the suspects legal team believes their clients may have been made out by authorities and/or the media to be patsies further allowing for gun control narratives to be pushed onto the public. The suspects legal team also questions the validity of the Sandy Hook shooting which some believe never took place and may have been a live active shooter drill, using crisis actors, perpetuated by the establishment media as a 'mass shooting' as covered heavily by Intellihub in the past.
"President Barack Obama will make a rare primetime address to the nation Sunday laying out how he will keep Americans safe and defeat the Islamic State group, days after 14 people were shot dead in California," AFP reports.
May I now ask the question: what the hell is going on here?
Psy Hop - Serving B.S. 24/7
A closer look at San Bernardino and the lies. N.Y. Man was posing as DHS, Really?